2015 Civil Law, Q12

A. Iya and Betty owed Jun P500,000.00 for advancing their equity in a corporation they joined as incorporators. Iya and Betty bound themselves solidarily liable for the debt. Later, Iya and Jun became sweethearts so Jun condoned the debt of P500,000.00. May lya demand from Betty P250,000.00 as her share in the debt? Explain with legal basis. (2%)
B. Juancho, Don and Pedro borrowed P150,000.00 from their friend Cita to put up an internet cafe orally promising to pay her the full amount after one year. Because of their lack of business know-how, their business collapsed. Juancho and Don ended up penniless but Pedro was able to borrow money and put up a restaurant which did well. Can Cita demand that Pedro pay the entire obligation since he, together with the two others, promised to pay the amount in full after one year? Defend your answer. (2%)

Quick check

Under Article 1220 of the Civil Code, what is the legal effect when a creditor remits the entire solidary obligation in favor of one solidary debtor?

Under Article 1207 of the Civil Code, when is an obligation with multiple debtors considered solidary?

What is the legal presumption under Article 1208 of the Civil Code when multiple debtors borrow money without specifying solidary liability?

Why can Cita only demand P50,000.00 from Pedro out of the P150,000.00 borrowed by Juancho, Don, and Pedro?

Choices available with full access.

If one joint debtor becomes insolvent, can the creditor compel another solvent joint debtor to pay the insolvent debtor's share?

Choices available with full access.

Unlock the full Civil Law answers

Learn more about these topics

1. Remission in Solidarity
Under Article 1220 of the Civil Code, the remission of the whole obligation obtained by one of the solidary debtors does not entitle her to reimbursement from her co-debtors. Remission is a gratuitous act or donation made by the creditor. Since the solidary debtor who benefited from the remission did not pay or expend any money or property to extinguish the obligation, she suffers no pecuniary loss. Consequently, she cannot claim contribution or reimbursement from her co-debtors for shares they would have otherwise owed.

2. Presumption of Jointness
Under Articles 1207 and 1208 of the Civil Code, when two or more debtors concur in a single obligation, the obligation is presumed to be joint rather than solidary. Solidary liability is never presumed and exists only when expressly stipulated by the parties, mandated by law, or required by the nature of the obligation. An oral agreement or promise by multiple debtors to pay an amount in full does not create solidary liability absent an explicit stipulation rendering each debtor liable for the entire debt.

3. Joint Liability Division
In a joint obligation, the credit or debt is presumed to be divided into as many equal shares as there are creditors or debtors. The share of each joint debtor is considered distinct and separate from the shares of the other co-debtors. Consequently, insolvency of one joint debtor does not make the remaining solvent joint debtors liable for his share. A joint creditor can demand from a joint debtor only his virile share of the total obligation.

About these questions and answers
The questions reproduced here are the official texts of the Philippine Bar Examinations, published by the Supreme Court. They are reproduced for study purposes.The suggested answers are the author’s own.

They are not official answers, have no connection with the Supreme Court, the Office of the Bar Confidant, or any bar review institution, and are not endorsed by any of them. Official answer keys, where released, should be preferred over anything here.Nothing on this page is legal advice, and reading it creates no lawyer-client relationship. Do not rely on any suggested answer in an actual legal matter. Consult counsel on your own facts.Suggested answers reflect the law and jurisprudence the author considers applicable as of the date shown.

Where a question comes from an earlier examination, the suggested answer applies the law as it now stands, which may differ from the law in force when the question was given, and may therefore differ from what would have been the correct answer at that time. Where the difference is material, the answer notes it.The practice scoring feature measures wording overlap with the suggested answer. It is not a grade, carries no official weight, and says nothing about whether your reasoning is sound.Errors are possible. If you find one, please tell me and I will correct it.Last reviewed: October 2026