Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

CHAPTER 3, SECTION 4
JOINT AND SOLIDARY OBLIGATIONS
(Articles 1207-1222)

DISCUSSION GUIDE
(WEEK 5)

1. There are two (2) kinds of obligations according to the number of parties :

(A) Individual obligation – An obligation where there is only one debtor (passive
subject/obligor) and one creditor (active subject/obligee).

Example 1: On January 1, 2013, D borrowed P300,000 from C due

on June 30, 2013.

(B) Collective obligation – An obligation where there are two or more debtors
AND/OR two or more creditors.

Example 2: On January 1, 2013, D1, D2, and D3 borrowed

P900,000 from C due on June 30, 2013.

Example 3: On January 1, 2013, D borrowed P900,000 from C1, C2

and C3 due on June 30, 2013.

Example 4: On January 1, 2013, D1, D2 and D3 borrowed P900,000

from C1, C2 and C3 due on June 30, 2013.

 In EXAMPLE 1 above, since the obligation is individual, it is clear that D

has the obligation to pay C the entire obligation of P300,000 on maturity date.

1
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

 In EXAMPLES 2, 3 & 4, however, since there are many creditors and/or

debtors in a single collective obligation, the following questions might be asked :

 In EXAMPLE 2, how much will D1 be liable on maturity date? Can D1 be made

liable for the entire P900,000? Can D1 be made liable only for one-half of the
P900,000? Can D1 be made liable for one-third of the P900,000? The obligation
in EXAMPLE 2 does not state. All that is clear from the obligation is that 3
debtors (D1, D2 & D3) are liable for P900,000 to C.
 In EXAMPLE 3, how much can C1 collect from D on maturity date? Can C1
collect the entire P900,000 from D? How much can C2 and C3 collect from D?

 In EXAMPLE 4, how much can C1 collect from D1? How much can C2 collect
from D3? How much can C3 collect from D1?

2. Article 1207 distinguishes between two (2) kinds of collective obligations

according to the nature of the parties’ rights and liabilities :

First, we make a distinction between DEBT and CREDIT.

DEBT refers to the obligation which the debtors are required to fulfil.
CREDIT refers to the right which the creditors have as against the debtors to compel
performance of the obligation.

(A) JOINT OBLIGATION – When the collective obligation is JOINT :

(A.1.) The DEBTORS will be liable only for their proportionate shares in the
DEBT (i.e., the share of the debtor after the total DEBT is equally
divided among the total number of debtors, e.g. P900,000 ÷ 3 debtors).
(A.2.) The CREDITORS can collect only their proportionate shares in the
CREDIT (i.e., the share of the creditor after the total CREDIT is equally
divided among the total number of creditors, e.g. P900,000 ÷ 3
creditors).

“Kanya-Kanyang Bayad at Kanya-Kanyang Singil”

2
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

(B) SOLIDARY OBLIGATION – When the collective obligation is SOLIDARY :

(A.1.) Any one of the DEBTORS can be made liable for the ENTIRE DEBT.
(A.2.) Any one of the CREDITORS can collect the ENTIRE CREDIT.

“ONE for ALL and ALL for ONE”

(Ang utang ko utang mo rin; ang kasalanan ko, kasalanan mo rin.)

3. Since solidary liability among the debtors is more burdensome than joint
liability, Article 1208 states that when the obligation is collective, and it is silent as to
the liability of the multiple parties, the obligation is presumed to be JOINT. Solidarity
among the debtors or among the creditors is never presumed.

4. Application of the distinction between joint and solidary liability. –

(A) In EXAMPLE 2 above, if the liability among the debtors D1, D2 and D3 is
JOINT, the joint debtors will be liable only for their proportionate part in the total
debt. Since there are three (3) debtors, the P900,000 debt will be divided
among the three (3). On June 30, 2013, C can collect the following amounts
from the debtors :

D1 = P300,000 and D2 = P300,000 and D3 = P300,000

Hence, if the debtors’ liability is joint, the creditor cannot collect more than the
debtor’s proportionate share in the total debt.

NOTE: In this example, since the liability is JOINT, there are three (3) debts
[P300,000 each for D1, D2 and D3]. However, there is only ONE (1) credit collectible
by C which is the total P900,000.

3
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

(B) In EXAMPLE 2 above, if the liability among the debtors D1, D2 and D3 is
SOLIDARY, any one of the solidary debtors may be held liable for the entire
obligation. Hence, even if only D1 pays C, the obligation will be totally
extinguished. On June 30, 2013, C can then collect the entire P900,000 from
any one of the debtors.

D1 = P900,000 or D2 = P900,000 or D3 = P900,000

NOTE: In this example, since the liability is SOLIDARY, there is only ONE
(1) DEBT (P900,000) which can be collected from any one or from all of the debtors
D1, D2 and D3 (Article 1216). There is also only ONE (1) CREDIT collectible by C
which is the total P900,000.
 There is here what we call PASSIVE SOLIDARITY, or solidarity on the
part of the debtors.

(C) In EXAMPLE 3 above, if the right to collect among the creditors C1, C2 and C3
is JOINT, the joint creditors can only collect from D their proportionate part in
the total credit. Since there are three (3) creditors, the P900,000 credit will be
divided among the three (3). On June 30, 2013, C1, C2 and C3 can collect only
the following amounts from the debtor D :

C1 = P300,000 and C2 = P300,000 and C3 = P300,000

Hence, if the creditors’ right to collect is joint, each creditor cannot collect
more than what is his proportionate part in the total credit.
Question : What if joint creditor C1 collects P900,000 from D, and D pays the
entire obligation to C1? What will be the legal effect?
Answer : Since D is aware that C1 is merely a joint creditor and has no right
to collect more than his proportionate part of the credit, the obligation will not be
totally extinguished. It will be extinguished only with respect to the P300,000 share of
C1. In other words, C2 and C3 can still collect from D their respective shares of
4
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

P300,000 each. It is now the problem of D to recover from C1 his overpayment in the
amount of P600,000. The source of C1’s obligation to return to D the P600,000
overpayment is solutio indebiti.
NOTE: In this example, since the right to collect is JOINT, there are three
(3) credits [P300,000 each for C1, C2 and C3]. However, there is only ONE (1) debt
payable by D which is the total P900,000.

(D) In EXAMPLE 3 above, if the right to collect among the creditors C1, C2 and C3
is SOLIDARY, any one of the solidary creditors will have the right to collect from
D the entire debt of P900,000. Hence, even if D pays the entire P900,000 to C1
only, the obligation will be totally extinguished. On June 30, 2013, any one of
the creditors C1, C2 or C3 can collect the entire P900,000 from D :

C1 = P900,000 or C2 = P900,000 or C3 = P900,000

NOTE: In this example, since the right to collect is SOLIDARY, there is only
ONE CREDIT [P900,000 which any one of the creditors C1, C2 or C3 can collect].
There is also only ONE (1) DEBT payable by D which is the total P900,000.
 There is here what we call ACTIVE SOLIDARITY, or solidarity on the part
of the creditors.

(E) Let us re-examine Example 4 above and all possible scenarios of rights and
liabilities among the creditors and debtors.

Example 4: On January 1, 2013, D1, D2 and D3 borrowed P900,000

from C1, C2 and C3 due on June 30, 2013.

(E.1.) JOINT liability to pay on the part of the debtors, and JOINT right to
collect on the part of the creditors.

5
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

 According to Article 1208, when the obligation is JOINT, the debt will be
divided into as many equal shares as there are DEBTORS. Also, the credit will be
divided into as many equal shares as there are CREDITORS. How do we compute
this?
THE DEBT (P900,000) THE CREDIT (P900,000)

Since there are 3 debtors there will also Since there are 3 creditors, there will
be 3 DEBTS. also be 3 CREDITS.

D1 = P300,000 C1 = P300,000
D2 = P300,000 C2 = P300,000
D3 = P300,000 C3 = P300,000

Breakdown of the debtors’ liabilities to Breakdown of the creditors’ right to

the creditors: collect from the debtors:
D1 C1
P100,000  C1 P100,000  D1
P100,000  C2 P100,000  D2
P100,000  C3 P100,000  D3
P300,000  Total amount payable P300,000  Total amount collectible

D2 C2
P100,000  C1 P100,000  D1
P100,000  C2 P100,000  D2
P100,000  C3 P100,000  D3
P300,000  Total amount payable P300,000  Total amount collectible

D3 C2
P100,000  C1 P100,000  D1
P100,000  C2 P100,000  D2
P100,000  C3 P100,000  D3
P300,000  Total amount payable P300,000  Total amount collectible

6
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

 How much can C1 collect from all the debtors on maturity date? P300,000
 How much can C1 collect from D1 on maturity date? Only P100,000. While the
total obligation of D1 is P300,000, he owes the amount to 3 joint creditors and not
to only 1 creditor.

(E.2.) SOLIDARY liability to pay on the part of the debtors, and

SOLIDARY right to collect on the part of the creditors.
 This is what we call MIXED SOLIDARITY or solidarity on the part of both
the debtors and the creditors.

THE DEBT (P900,000) THE CREDIT (P900,000)

Since there is solidarity on the part of the Since there is solidarity on the part of the
debtors, there is only 1 DEBT and any creditors, there is only 1 CREDIT and any
one of the debtors may be compelled to one of the creditors has the right to
pay the entire obligation. collect the entire obligation

D1 ] C1 ]
D2 ] P900,000 C2 ] P900,000
D3 ] C3 ]

 How much can C1 collect from D1 on maturity date? P900,000

 How much can C2 collect from D3 on maturity date? P900,000

(E.3.) JOINT liability to pay on the part of the debtors, and SOLIDARY
right to collect on the part of the creditors.
 There is here ACTIVE SOLIDARITY or solidarity on the part of the
creditors.

7
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

THE DEBT (P900,000) THE CREDIT (P900,000)

Since there is joint liability on the part of Since there is solidarity on the part of the
the debtors, there are three (3) DEBTS. creditors, there is only one (1) CREDIT
Each of the debtors will be liable only for and any one of the creditors has the right
his proportionate part of the obligation. to collect the entire obligation

D1 = P300,000 C1 ]
D2 = P300,000 C2 ] P900,000
D3 = P300,000 C3 ]

 How much can C1 collect from D1 on maturity date? P300,000

 How much can C2 collect from D3 on maturity date? P300,000
 Can C1 collect the entire P900,000 from D1, D2 and D3? YES, because C1 is a
solidary creditor.
 Can C1 collect the entire P900,000 from D1 only? NO, because while C1 is a
solidary creditor and can collect the entire P900,000, D1 is only a joint debtor who
cannot be held liable beyond his proportionate part in the total obligation
equivalent to P300,000.

(E.4.) SOLIDARY liability to pay on the part of the debtors, and JOINT
right to collect on the part of the creditors.
 There is here PASSIVE SOLIDARITY or solidarity on the part of the
debtors.

8
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

THE DEBT (P900,000) THE CREDIT (P900,000)

Since there is joint right on the part of the

Since there is solidary liability on the part
of the debtors, there is only ONE (1)
DEBT. Any one of the debtors may be
made liable for the entire obligation.
creditors to collect, there are three (3)
CREDITS belonging separately to each
of the creditors. Hence, each creditor
has the right to collect only a
proportionate part of the credit.

D1 ] C1 = P300,000
D2 ] P900,000 C2 = P300,000
D3 ] C3 = P300,000

 How much can C1 collect from D1 on maturity date? P300,000

 How much can C2 collect from D3 on maturity date? P300,000
 Can C1 collect the entire P900,000 from D1? NO, because C1 is only a joint
creditor and cannot collect beyond his proportionate share in the credit.
 Can C1, C2 and C3 collect the entire P900,000 from D1 only? YES, because D1
is a solidary debtor and can be made liable for the entire debt.

5. CREDITOR’S DUTY AFTER COLLECTION OF ENTIRE CREDIT (Article

1215, par. 2) – In a solidary obligation, after a solidary creditor collects the entire
obligation, he has the duty to give to the other solidary creditors their respective
shares in the credit.

DEBTOR’S RIGHT AFTER PAYMENT OF ENTIRE DEBT (Article

1217, par. 2) – In a solidary obligation, the solidary debtor who is compelled to pay
the entire obligation has the right to ask for reimbursement (refund) from the other
solidary debtors for their proportionate share in the obligation.

Example: In the discussion under (E.2.) above where there is MIXED

SOLIDARITY, if C1 collects from D2 the entire obligation :

9
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

(a) The collecting solidary creditor C1 has the obligation to give P300,000 of
the collected credit to C2, and P300,000 to C3.
(b) The paying solidary debtor D2 has the right to ask for reimbursement
(refund) for the paid debt in the amount of P300,000 from D1, and
P300,000 from D3.

 NOTE: It is important to remember, however, that a paying solidary debtor will

not be entitled to reimbursement from his co-debtors if he pays after
the obligation has prescribed or become illegal (Article 1218).

6. What if one of the solidary debtors becomes insolvent (bankrupt) and cannot
reimburse his share to the solidary debtor paying the entire obligation? What will be
the effect?

PROBLEM: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C1, C2 and C3 (solidary

creditors) the amount of P600,000 due on June 30, 2013. The debts of the
debtors in the obligation are specified as follows :
D1  P150,000
D2  P250,000
D3  P200,000

On June 30, 2013, C1 collects from D2 the entire obligation. D2 then pays
P600,000 to C1.

As discussed above, after payment is made by D2 of the entire obligation

to C1, C1 will be obliged to give the other solidary creditors C2 and C3 their
shares in the credit of P300,000 each. On the other hand, D2 will have the
right to ask for reimbursement from the other solidary debtors as follows :
P150,000 from D1 and P200,000 from D3.
Question : What if D3 becomes insolvent and D1 is the only one who can
pay P150,000 to D2? Who will shoulder the P200,000 share of D3?

10
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)


 Answer : Under Article 1217, paragraph 3, when one of the solidary debtors
becomes insolvent (bankrupt) and is unable to make a refund of the payment
advanced by the paying solidary debtor, the share of the insolvent debtor shall be
shouldered by the other solvent co-debtors in proportion to the debt of each. What
does this mean, and how is this computed?
In our problem, the paying solidary debtor is D2, whose share in the debt is P250,000.
D1 is the solvent debtor whose share in the debt is P150,000. The insolvent debtor is
D3, whose share in the debt is P200,000. After D2 pays the entire debt, he will now
ask for reimbursement (refund) from his co-debtors.
Since D3 is insolvent, his share will be shouldered by D1 and D2 in proportion to their
debts. The computation is as follows :

Share of insolvent debtor D3 in the total debt  P200,000

Share of D1 in the total debt  P150,000

Share of D2 in the total debt  P250,000
P400,000

Proportionate share of D1 in D3’s share  P150,000/P400,000 = 3/8

 3/8 of P200,000
 P75,000
Proportionate share of D2 in D3’s share  P250,000/P400,000 = 5/8
 5/8 of P200,000
 P125,000
Of the P200,000 share of the insolvent debtor D3, P75,000 will be shouldered by D1
and P125,000 will be shouldered by D2.
Therefore, after D2 pays the entire P600,000 debt to the creditors, and D3 becomes
insolvent, D1 will be obliged to reimburse D2 the total amount of P225,000 broken
down as follows :
D1’s share in the debt  P150,000

11
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

D1’s reimbursement share in D3’s debt  P 75,000

TOTAL  P225,000
7. ARTICLE 1211. Solidarity may exist although the creditors and the debtors
may not be bound in the same manner and by the same periods and conditions.

Illustrative Example: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C

P300,000. The debtors, however, are bound under the following
periods and conditions :

D1 – to pay C P50,000 on June 30, 2013

D2 – to pay C P150,000 on April 30, 2013 if C will pass the BAR
exams.
D3 – to pay C P100,000 on December 15, 2013.

 Question: If C decides to collect on July 3, 2013, how much can he collect

from D2?
Answer : As of June 30, 2013, only P50,000 of the debtors’ debt has
become due, and this is the only amount that C can collect on July 3, 2013. However,
since the liability among the debtors is solidary, any one of the debtors may be made
liable for the debt that has become due. Hence, on July 3, 2013, C can also collect
the P50,000 from D2 or D3.

 Question: On April 15, 2013, the results of the BAR exams were released.
On May 15, C went to D1 to collect on the obligation. How much can C collect from
D1?
Answer : As of April 30, 2013, P200,000 of the debtors’ debt is already
due. As of April 30, 2013 then, C can already collect the amount of P200,000. Again,
since the liability among the debtors is solidary, any one of the debtors may be made
liable for the debt that has become due. Hence, C can collect the entire P200,000
now due from D1 on May 15, 2013.

12
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

 Question: Let us assume that on May 15, 2013, D1 paid C the P200,000
being collected. On December 16, 2013, can C collect from D1 the balance on the
obligation in the amount of P100,000?
Answer : YES. As of December 15, 2013, the entire obligation is already
due. Hence, anyone of the solidary debtors may be compelled to pay the entire
obligation. However, since P200,000 had already been previously paid, D1 will be
liable only for the balance of P100,000. After full payment, D1 now has the right to
ask for reimbursement from his co-solidary debtors for their proportionate shares in
the debt.

 NOTE: This limitation on the creditor’s right to collect does not destroy the
solidary character of the obligation because, at the end of the day, he can still compel
one and the same debtor, if that is his wish, to pay the entire obligation. (See Article
1216)

8. ART. 1212. Each one of the solidary creditors may do whatever may be
useful to the other solidary creditors, but not anything which may be prejudicial or
disadvantageous to them.

Example of a beneficial act: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C1, C2 and C3
(solidary creditors) P300,000 due on December 30, 2003. It was also agreed upon
between the parties that if the debt is not collected on or before December 30, 2013,
the debt will be considered renounced or abandoned by the creditors and will be good
as extinguished.
On December 29, 2013, only C1 goes to D1 to collect the entire obligation. In this
case, the demand made by C1 before December 30, 2013 expires will also benefit the
other creditors who did not make the demand.

Example of a prejudicial act: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C1, C2 and C3
(solidary creditors) P600,000 due on June 30, 2013. Before maturity date, and
without informing the other solidary creditors, C1 informed the solidary debtors that he
(C1) was condoning the debt (i.e. excusing the debtors from their obligation). The
result of condonation is the extinguishment of the obligation.
13
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

Question 1: Is the obligation totally extinguished even if it was only C1 who condoned
the debt without the knowledge and consent of C2 and C3?
Answer : In a solidary obligation, the slogan is “One for all and all for one.”
Therefore, the act of one solidary creditor will also bind the other solidary creditors,
because it is always presumed that each solidary creditor is an agent of, and acts with
the authority of, the other solidary creditors. Hence, the act of C1, although
prejudicial, will also bind C2 and C3. The result is that the obligation will be totally
extinguished, and the debtors will be completely released from their liability under the
obligation (Article 1215, par. 1).
Question 2: Now that the obligation is extinguished, what will happen to the shares of
C2 and C3 in the P600,000 credit?
Answer : Under Article 1215, par. 2, C1 who executed the prejudicial act in this case
will be the one liable to C2 and C3 for their respective shares in the credit – that is,
P200,000 each. This is only fair because C1 had no right to renounce the shares of
the other solidary creditors who had the right to collect on their credit. C1 has the
right to renounce only his share in the credit.

9. We said that if the obligation is condoned, the effect is the extinguishment of

the obligation. What if the condonation of the entire obligation was made in favour of
one of the solidary debtors only? Will the condonation also benefit the other solidary
debtors, and release them from liability for their proportionate shares?

 Under Article 1220, the condonation or remission of the entire obligation,

even if obtained by only one of the solidary debtors, will also benefit the other solidary
debtors. That is why the solidary debtor who obtained the remission will not be
entitled to reimbursement from his co-debtors because he never paid anything to the
creditors.

Illustrative Example: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C1, C2 and C3 (solidary
creditors) P300,000 due on December 30, 2013. C1 later fell in love with D1, and
proposed marriage to D1. C1, without the consent of C2 and C3, then condoned or
remitted the entire obligation because of his love for D1.

14
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

 Since the obligation has been entirely remitted by one of the solidary creditors,
the obligation is now extinguished and all the debtors are released from their liability.
 As discussed earlier, C1 will be liable to C2 and C3 for P100,000 each.
 D1, however, cannot ask for reimbursement from D2 and D3 in the amount of
P100,000 each, even if she was the reason by D2 and D3 were released from liability,
because she never made any actual payment to the creditors.

10. ART. 1213. A solidary creditor cannot assign his rights without the
consent of the other solidary creditors.
Reason for the provision : If a solidary creditor decides to assign or transfer his credit
to a third person, he should first obtain the consent of all the other solidary creditors.
This is to make sure that the assignee/transferee (the person to whom the credit is
assigned/transferred) has the trust of the other solidary creditors. This will also avoid
a situation wherein the assignee, after receiving payment of the entire obligation,
does not deliver the proportionate shares of the other solidary creditors.

Illustrative Application: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C1, C2 and C3

(solidary creditors) P300,000 due on December 30, 2013. On August 30, 2013, C1
who was about to migrate to the U.S.A. assigned his credit to S who now took the
place of C1 as solidary creditor in the obligation. C1 informed all the debtors about
the assignment or transfer of his credit to S.
On December 30, 2013, S went to D1 to collect the entire obligation. D1 then paid
S P300,000. Thereafter, S was never seen again by C2 and C3. As solidary
creditors, C2 and C3 are now collecting their shares from D1.
Question: Did the payment of D1 to S, as assignee of C1, completely extinguish the
solidary debtors’ obligation?
Answer : NO. In this case, notice was given by C1 to the debtors that he was
assigning his share in the credit to S. No notice was, however, given to the other
solidary creditors C2 and C3 who were not aware of the assignment. Because the
assignment was without the consent of C2 and C3, the payment made by D1 will only
extinguish the share of C1 in the obligation. Therefore, the shares of C2 and C3 in

15
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

the obligation remains to be collectible. Hence, C2 and C3 still have the right to
collect from D1 their respective shares in the obligation. D1 here will suffer the loss
for wrongful payment (payment to the wrong creditor). It will be D1’s problem now as
to how he will recover his overpayment of P200,000 from S.

11. ART. 1214. In a solidary obligation, to whom is a solidary debtor

obliged to pay?

 General rule : In a solidary obligation, the debtor may pay any one of the
solidary creditors. Payment made to any one of the solidary creditors will extinguish
the entire obligation. (Articles 1216, 1st sentence and 1214)
 Exception : If one of the solidary creditors makes a demand (judicial or
extrajudicial) on one of the solidary debtors, that solidary debtor who received the
demand should make payment only to the solidary creditor making the demand. If
payment of the entire obligation is made to another creditor (who did not make the
demand), only that creditor’s share in the obligation will be extinguished. ( Article
1214)
 Question : A solidary creditor makes a demand on one of the solidary debtors.
Another solidary debtor (who receives no demand), however, pays the entire
obligation to another solidary creditor (who did not make the demand). Will the
obligation be totally extinguished?

Illustrative Application: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C1, C2 and C3

(solidary creditors) P300,000 due on December 30, 2013. On December 30, 2013,
C3 demanded from D1 payment of the entire obligation.
 If D1 pays C3 the P300,000, the solidary debtors’ entire obligation will be
extinguished, and all the debtors will be released from liability. D2 and D3 will
now reimburse D1 for their shares in the debt.
 If D1 pays C1 the P300,000, the obligation will be extinguished only to the
extent of P100,000, the share of C1 in the credit. Therefore, if C1 does not remit

16
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

to C2 and C3 their respective shares in the credit, C2 and C3 can still collect their
shares from any of the solidary debtors.
 If D2 (the solidary debtor who did not receive any demand) pays the P300,000
to C1 (the solidary creditor who did not make the demand), the solidary debtors’
entire obligation will be extinguished, and all the debtors will be released from
liability.

12. ART. 1222. The solidary debtor who is being sued or compelled to
pay the obligation may avail himself of the following defenses to excuse himself from
the performance of the obligation demanded by the creditors :

(A) Defenses derived from the nature of the obligation. – This is a complete
defense which is available to all the solidary debtors. Since the entire obligation is
void, it cannot be demanded by any of the solidary creditors from any of the solidary
debtors.

Illustrative Application: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C1, C2 and C3

(solidary creditors) P300,000 due on December 30, 2013. The obligation arises
out of the sale of a smuggled firearm.
 In this case, the obligation is void because it is illegal. This is a complete
defense. Any one of the debtors may refuse to pay any one of the creditors
because the obligation is void, and cannot be enforced.

(B) Defenses which are personal to the debtor alone who is sued. – This is a
complete defense but available only to the solidary debtor being sued and his share.
The shares of the other solidary debtors, who do not have the same defense, can still
be collected by the solidary creditors.

Illustrative Application: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C1, C2 and C3

(solidary creditors) P300,000 due on December 30, 2013. At the time the obligation

17
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

was contracted, D1 was insane and incapacitated to enter into a contract for lack of a
valid consent.
 As to D1, there was no valid contract of loan because he was insane at the time
the contract was entered into. Hence, D1 cannot be compelled to pay any part of
the obligation by the creditors. As to D1, his insanity at the time the contract was
perfected is a complete defense.
 However, the shares of the other solidary debtors D2 and D3 may still be
collected because they had legal capacity at the time the contract was entered
into.

(C) Defenses which pertain to the share of the debtor alone who is sued. – This
is only a partial defense because it is available to the debtor being sued, but only with
respect to his share in the debt and not with respect to the shares of his co-solidary
debtors.

Illustrative Example: D1, D2 and D3 (solidary debtors) owe C

P300,000. The debtors, however, are bound under the following
periods and conditions :

D1 – to pay C P50,000 on June 30, 2013

D2 – to pay C P150,000 on April 30, 2013 if C will pass the BAR
exams.
D3 – to pay C P100,000 on December 15, 2013.

 In this example, if D2 does not pass the BAR exams, his obligation to pay C
P150,000 will not arise and will be extinguished. However, when the obligations of
his co-solidary debtors D1 and D2 become due on June 30, 2013 and December 15,
2013, D2 can still be made liable for their shares in the amounts of P50,000 and
P100,000, respectively. The defense of D2 in this case is merely partial and not
complete because he can still be made liable with respect to the shares of D1 and D2.

18
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

(D) Defenses which pertain to the share of the other debtors who are not sued. –
This is also only a partial defense because the share of the debtor sued can still be
collected. Only the share of the other solidary debtor, who has a defense, cannot be
collected by the solidary creditors.

 In the illustrative example in letter (B) above, C1 goes to D2 on December 30,

2013 to collect the entire obligation. Since one of the solidary debtors D1
was insane at the time the obligation was contracted, D2 can set up the
partial defense that D1’s share is not collectible. C1 cannot compel D2 to pay
the share of D1. The liability of D2 will then be limited to P200,000 – the
shares of D2 and D3 in the debt. Here, the defense of insanity which is
personal to D1 is availed of by D2 as a partial defense in excusing himself
from payment of D1’s portion of the obligation.

13. ART. 1221. – What are the rights and obligations of solidary debtors
in case of loss of the prestation to be delivered or performed? It would really depend
upon whether there is fault or delay.

(A) If the thing is lost due to a fortuitous event: The obligation will be extinguished.
(B) If the thing is lost due to the fault of one of the solidary debtors : Since the
liability is solidary, all the debtors can be made liable by the solidary creditors
for the value of the object plus damages and interest. After payment to the
solidary creditors, however, the solidary debtors who were not at fault have the
right to ask for reimbursement for the value of the damages from the solidary
debtor who was at fault.
(C) If the thing is lost due to a fortuitous event BUT AFTER one of the solidary
debtors incur legal delay (See also Article 1165, par. 3): The effect is the same
as in letter (B).

Illustrative Application: D1, D2 and D3 solidarily promised to deliver to C, on

December 30, 2013, a BMW car with plate number ABC-123 worth P6M. On
December 2, 2013, D1 who was drunk while driving smashed the car to an acacia
tree. The damage to the car was beyond repair. On December 30, 2013, C goes to

19
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

D2 demanding for the performance of the obligation. Since the car could no longer be
delivered, C lost a client and suffered business losses amounting to P50,000. How
much can C collect from D2?
 Under Article 1221, since D2 is a solidary debtor, he can be held liable by C for
the entire obligation and/or the damages caused due to non-performance of the
obligation.

 In the instant case, since the car was lost due to the fault of D1, D2 will be liable
for the value of the car (P6M) plus the damages suffered by C in the amount of
P50,000.

 After payment, D2 will be entitled to reimbursement from his co-solidary debtors

in the following amounts :
D1  P2M (proportionate part in the debt) + P50,000 (damages) = P2,050,000
D3  P2M (proportionate part in the debt) only because he is the innocent
solidary debtor

APPLICATION/PROBLEMS. –

1. Jojo and Jaja sold 1,000 sacks of rice to Kiko and Kaka for P1.5M. On Kiko’s
request and after paying the price therefor, Jojo and Jaja delivered to him the 1,000 sacks
of rice. Later, Kiko resold the rice for P2M and did not turn over any part of it or its price
to Kaka. Kaka now demands for the delivery of the rice. May Kaka compel Jojo and Jaja
to deliver what he bought? If so, how much will Jojo and Jaja be liable to Kaka under the
factual circumstances of the case?

2. On February 15, 2012, Lyn and Rose, in a solidary obligation, bound

themselves to pay P1.5M to Jona, Larry, and Don subject to the following terms and
conditions: Jona’s share will be due on June 1, 2012; Larry will get his share only if he
passes the 2012 Bar Examinations; and Don, a fourth year LM student, will get his share
only after he graduates from college in 2013.

20
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

(a) On March 25, 2013, shortly before deliberation on the status of graduates, Don
went to Rose and sought to recover the entire P1.5 M. Don alleged that since Lyn and
Rose were solidarily debtors, anyone of them may be made to answer for the entire
P1.5M obligation. May Don recover from Lyn? If so, how much?
(b) On April 15, 2013, the results of the Bar Exams came out, on the same day the
LM graduation rites took place. Both Larry and Don made it. Upon hearing the news,
Jona, who was Larry’s sister, immediately went to Lyn and sought to recover under the
debtors’ obligation. How much can Jona recover from Lyn?

3. Jerome, Sam and Nikki promised to give a Toyota Altis car worth P1.5M in
favor of Sky, Lei, Dane and Zier. Jerome became insolvent, so the other debtors could
not purchase the car to be given to the creditors. Later, Dane and Zier informed the
debtors that they were giving up and waiving their rights under the obligation. In other
words, Dane and Zier were no longer interested in the obligation. How much can the
remaining creditors Sky and Lei each collect from each of the debtors?

4. Benjie obliged to give solidary creditors Connie and Alejo P100,000 on June
30, 2013. On May 15, 2013, Connie assigned his right to collect under the obligation to
Baby. Connie informed Benjie about the assignment. On June 30, 2013, as promised,
Benjie paid the entire P100,000 obligation to Baby. On July 1, 2013, alleging that he has
as yet not received any payment, Alejo demanded from Benjie his proportionate share in
the credit in the amount of P50,000. Does Benjie still have an obligation to Alejo?

5. Teotimo and Vicente, solidary debtors, promised to pay Lydio, Ison, and Sefa,
solidary creditors, the amount of P300,000 on December 31, 2012. On January 15, 2013,
the lawyer of Sefa sent a demand letter to Teotimo demanding for payment of the entire
P300,000. However, Vicente, who did not know of the demand, had paid Lydio the entire
P300,000 on the very same day the demand was made. Is the debtors’ obligation now
extinguished? Assuming that Lydio does not remit to Sefa her proportionate share in the
entire credit in the amount of P100,000, can Sefa still collect the said amount from
Teotimo?

21
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

6. Maria and Clara are solidary debtors of Juan, Pedro and Jose, solidary
creditors for the amount of P600,000. Juan subsequently fell in love with Maria. On the
night he proposed marriage, Juan told Maria to forget about the whole obligation because
Juan was waiving the entire P600,000 obligation. Maria accepted Juan’s proposal, and
immediately went to Clara asking reimbursement for her (Clara’s) proportionate share in
the obligation. Is Clara obliged to reimburse Maria, considering that the entire debt would
not have been remitted by Juan had it not been for Maria?

7. In the preceding question in No. 6, what will become of the proportionate

shares of Pedro and Jose assuming that the obligation is now totally extinguished? Can
they still recover their respective shares in the credit under the factual circumstances?

8. Paul, Ken, Jake and Mark are solidary debtors of Anne for P400,000. After
Mark paid the entire P400,000 to Anne, he went to Paul asking for reimbursement in the
amount of P300,000. Mark contends that since their obligation is solidary, after he paid
the entire debt to Anne, the other solidary debtors will now also be solidary obligors of
Mark with respect to the remaining balance of the debt in the amount of P300,000, after
subtracting Mark’s proportionate share of P100,000. Do you agree with Mark’s
contention? In other words, can Mark ask for reimbursement from Paul in the amount of
P300,000?

9. On January 15, 2011, Donna, Diana and Dora signed a promissory note which
read as follows : “For value received, we promise solidarily to pay Caloy and Carmel the
sum of P600,000 on or before June 30, 2012.” On December 25, 2011, Carmel fell in
love with Diana, and remitted her share in the obligation. On January 28, 2012, Donna
became insolvent.

(a) On July 1, 2012, Caloy went to the house of Diana and wanted to recover the entire
P600,000 only from Diana. Can Caloy do so? How much can Caloy hold Diana
liable under the factual circumstances?

(b) After Donna had become insolvent, on February 5, 2012, Dora paid the entire
P600,000 obligation to Caloy who acknowledged receipt of the entire amount. After

22
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

paying the said amount, Dora now seeks reimbursement from Diana. How much is
Diana’s liability to Dora?

(c) Caloy and Carmel had an altercation on the occasion of one of their drinking sprees.
Thereafter, or on June 30, 2012, to make sure that Carmel would not be able to do
anything to cheat Caloy out of his share in the obligation, Caloy instructed his lawyer
to send a demand letter to Diana demanding from her payment of Caloy’s share in
the credit in the amount of P300,000. Does Caloy’s act have legal basis? Can Diana
be compelled to pay Caloy the amount of P300,000 despite the remission earlier
granted by Carmel in her favor?

10. Cedric and Matt are solidarily obliged to give Kat a 2008 Ford Explorer pick-up
worth P1M on December 15, 2012. On November 30, 2012, Kat was able to close a deal
with Jojo who was willing to pay for P1.5M for the pick-up upon delivery. Cedric drove the
pick-up and figured in an accident after he beat the red light along the intersection of
Roxas Boulevard and Pedro Gil Street. Cedric miraculously survived the crash, but the
car was completely wrecked beyond recognition. While Cedric was recovering in the
hospital, Kat went to Matt and demanded from him the amount of P1.5M. Matt, however,
refused to pay Kat the entire amount demanded. As a solidary debtor, Matt did not deny
liability on the amount of P1M. Matt, however, posited that the additional amount of
P500,000 which Kat seeks to recover as damages should properly be demanded only
from Cedric whose negligence was the proximate cause for the loss of the pick-up to be
delivered. Does Matt’s argument have legal basis?

11. On April 15, 2012, Gladys, Tere and Ella signed a promissory note in favor of
Francis. At the time of the signing, Ella was suffering from schizophrenia. In the
promissory note, the solidary debtors bound themselves to pay Francis, on April 15,
2013, the amount of P120,000. When maturity date came, the debtors did not make
good their promise under the note. Hence, on April 30, 2013, Francis filed an action
against Gladys demanding for the payment of the entire P120,000 obligation. How much
is Gladys liable to Francis under the promissory note, and considering the factual
circumstances?

*** END ***

Prepared by :

23
Chapter 3, Section 4 – Joint and Solidary Obligations (Articles 1207-1222)

Atty. Harriet Reyes Linsangan

July 2, 2013

24