Practice question
A principal totally pays a valid solidary civil award. Only afterward does the creditor purport to remit the other principal’s share. The latter says this destroys the paying principal’s already arising recourse. Which is correct?
- Article 1219 preserves the co-debtor responsibility in the stated payment-before-remission sequence.
- A later remission necessarily confiscates the payer’s recourse.
- Payment timing is always irrelevant.
- Every creditor may erase another person’s already paid share without qualification.
- The first principal must pay the award again.
Legal references
- Revised Penal Code, Articles 109-110, apportioned shares and recourse: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/28/20426
- Civil Code, Articles 774-776, 1216-1220, 1231-1238, 1288 and 1292, as particularly relevant: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra1949/ra_386_1949.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.