Joint and Solidary Obligations

 Will come into play in case of plurality of subjects (2 or more creditors or debtors)
 Basis of classification is the number of subjects whether on side of creditor or debtor, or both
 Referring to one obligation but there are several subjects
 In Joint Obligation, creditors and debtors are to be apportioned proportionately; each of the debtor
is liable to a portion of the indebtedness; each of the creditors is entitled only to a portion of the
joint credit

 In solidary obligation, each one of the debtors can be made to pay the entire obligation; while each
one of the creditors is entitled to collect the entire credit

 In case of plurality of subjects, what is the nature of the obligation? Is it joint or solidary? – there
is a presumption in law in favor of existence of joint obligation

o Solidarity can exist in only 3 situations:

 When the law so provides for solidarity
 When the stipulation or agreement of the parties provides for solidarity
 When the nature of the obligation requires solidarity

 Important : In a joint obligation, the share of each of the debtor in the indebtedness or the share of
each of the creditors in the credit is distinct and separate from the others.
o If only one of the debtors was a recipient of the demand, but the other joint debtors did not
receive any demand from the creditor, only the recipient of the demand will be in default or
in delay
o In case of insolvency of one of the joint debtors, that will not affect the liability of the other
joint debtors because the share of the insolvent joint debtor is distinct and separate from
the others
o Prescription: if one of the joint debts has prescribed, that will not have any bearing upon
the debt of the other debtors whose debits haven’t prescribed
o In JO, how do you apportion the indebtedness or the credit? – the law presumes that each
of the share of the debtors or creditors is equal unless there is proof to the contrary
 Solidary Obligation
o Nature
 If the debtors are solidary, each one is liable to pay the entire indebtedness
 For solidary creditors, each one has the right to demand the entire credit
 Agreement of the parties is one of the reasons for solidarity.
 In case law, there are uses of words that indicate solidarity:
o Joint and several
o Jointly and severally
o In solidum
o Individually and collectively
 Under negotiable instruments law, if pronoun “I” is used in promissory notes and there are several
makers, the obligation will be solidary.
 o If the word used is “We”, the law presumes that it be joint
 Solidarity that exists only on the part of the debtor – passive solidarity
 Solidarity that exists only on the part of the creditor – active solidarity
 On both – mixed solidarity

Passive Solidarity

 Distinguishing characteristic: May any of the debtors be a representative of the other debtors? Is
there a mutual agency? – NO – this agency applies only in active solidarity
o What it has is a mutual guarantee (not mutual agency), that each of them guarantees the
payment of the shares of the others, such that any one of them can be made the entire;
creditor can choose from any one of them
 3 available defenses on part of Solidary debtors
o Based on the nature of obligation itself
 Ex If defense that obli is void
 Ex If unenforceable
 Effect: That is a complete defense available for the entire indebtedness
available to each one of the SD.
o Personal to a SD
 Ex. Not liable to pay the entire indebtedness due mental insanity at the time it was
contracted
 Complete defense but only on the part of the SD who put up that defense
 Personal to debtor but effect will be limited only to his share or portion– EX. when a
share of SD is subject to a condition or term and the term has not arrived or the
condition has not been fulfilled
o Defense which is personal to the others
 Partial effect

Active Solidarity

 Exist among creditor

 Distinguishing characteristic
o Mutual agency or mutual representation between and among creditors; each one can be
considered as agent for the others
 So long as act benefits the others; Art 1212
 But, Art 1215 ; innovation, condonation, by one of solidary creditors will extinguish
the debtor’s indebtedness
 No inconsistency in the provision because they are directed to two different
kinds of relationships.
 Art 1212 – only among them, they may only execute acts beneficial, not
prejudicial
 Art 1215 – different kind of relations – that which seeks to govern relation
of creditor vis-à-vis the debtors
 Each one of the creditors can go after the erring creditor for their respective shares
 In passive S, each can be made to pay the entire; on the side of SC, each has right to demand
payment of entire credit; except for principle in Art 1214 - if there has been a demand made by one
of the SC addressed to one of the SD.
o Effect of the demand is, for the meantime, is fixed between X –creditor and Z-debtor,
insofar as they are concerned. Parang sila lang ang C and D for the meantime
 If payment made to another creditor (who sis not X), it will be an invalid payment
made to a wrong party; so debtor can be made to pay again
 Refusal of tender of payment will be valid , because B is not a debtor for the
meantime
 Art 1215 vis 1212
 112 – relationship existing only among creditor; 1215 creditors and their debtors
 ABC – debtors; XYX creditors;
o X to A – condone the entire $100,000 Indebtedness in favor of A
 Is the entire obligation extinguished? Yes by virtue of 1215
 How about shares or Y and Z? they can go after X pursuant to 1212 – only do
beneficial
 A sought to collect from B and C – NO- 1220 – condonation was made out of pure
liberaliy, A cannot demand reimbursement from the other solidary debtors
o X to A - $900,000 – of the $900,000, share of A that is $300,000 was condoned
 May XYZ collect the balance of $600,000 from A?- NO, if the entire share of one of
the SDs had been condoned by any of the SCs, insofar as creditors are concerned, he
will cease to be a debtor; so balance of $600,000 can no longer be recovered from A
 If the entire share of A was condoned and only shares of BC remain, what if B turned
out to be insolvent; how much will be the liability of C? there is mutual guarantee
that exists in passive solidarity ; C can be made to pay for the entire $600,000.
 How about A? Act of the creditor cannot affect the relationship that exists
among the SDs; therefore, in case of insolvency of the remaining SDs, A can
still be made to pay for proportionate share of the share of debtors
o X to A – of the $300,00 share of A, X condones $150,000 (half of share);
 may the balance of $750,000 be collected from A? YES- if only a portion of the share
of one of the SDs was condoned by one of SCs, he will remain to be a debtor insofar
as creditors are concerned

If the entire share of one of the solidary debtors had been condoned, by any of the solidary creditors
insofar as the solidary debtors are concerned, he will cease to become a debtor. But remember, the
creditor will not be affected by the relationship of the solidary debtors.

If the entire share of A was condoned by one of the solidary creditors, and only the shares of B and C will
remain, what is B will turn out to be insolvent, how much will be the liability of the remaining debtors?
There is mutual guaranty that exists in passive solidarity. The debtor whose share is condoned can still
be made to pay. For a proportionate share of the insolvent debtor.
If only a portion of the share of one of the solidary debtors was condoned by one of the solidary
creditors, he will remain to be a debtor even insofar as the creditors are concerned.