Practice question
Dario proposes Ema as substitute debtor; the creditor accepts and releases Dario. Ema was already insolvent at delegation, Dario knew it, and the creditor did not. The creditor later invokes Article 1295. Which answer is best?
- The exception can never apply after creditor consent.
- Only public knowledge counts; Dario’s actual knowledge is irrelevant.
- Only insolvency beginning after substitution can matter.
- The creditor’s action against Dario may revive because the insolvency already existed and was known to Dario when he delegated the debt.
- The exception requires Dario’s written promise to guarantee solvency in every case.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html — Civil Code, articles 1293–1295.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/aug2023/gr_259469_2023.html — Aliguyon v Dummang, GR 259469, August 30 2023, main opinion: creditor consent and expromisión/delegación.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.