Principle of Rebus Sic Stantibus as applied to obligations | Loss of the Thing Due | Extinguishment of Obligations | Obligations | OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS

Principle of Rebus Sic Stantibus as Applied to Obligations in Philippine Civil Law

The principle of rebus sic stantibus is rooted in the idea that contractual obligations are valid only as long as the essential circumstances surrounding the contract remain the same as when it was created. In the Philippines, this principle applies as an exception under the doctrine of the pacta sunt servanda—which holds that agreements must be honored. However, when unforeseen and extraordinary changes alter the fundamental circumstances that formed the basis of an obligation, rebus sic stantibus may allow for the revision or extinguishment of that obligation.

Legal Foundation and Application

1. Basis in Philippine Law

While rebus sic stantibus is not explicitly stated in the Civil Code of the Philippines, it is derived from:

• Articles 1266 and 1267 of the Civil Code, which address cases where the thing due is lost or the service becomes impossible due to extraordinary events.
• Article 1266 specifically refers to obligations to do or not to do, providing that an obligation may be extinguished if the act required becomes legally or physically impossible.
• Article 1267 applies the principle to contracts and obligations that have become excessively difficult to fulfill due to unforeseen events.

2. Conditions for Invocation

For rebus sic stantibus to apply, the following conditions must be met:

• Extraordinary Events: The change in circumstances must be unforeseen, extraordinary, and beyond the control of the obligor.
• Fundamental Alteration: The event or circumstance must fundamentally alter the equilibrium of the contract, making it excessively burdensome or practically impossible to perform the obligation.
• Foreseeability: The extraordinary circumstance should not have been foreseeable at the time the contract was made, nor should it have been contemplated by the parties.
• Good Faith: The obligor invoking this principle must be acting in good faith, showing that they have attempted to perform the obligation but have been prevented by the extraordinary change.

Application in Philippine Case Law

Philippine courts have addressed the principle in several cases, although it is sparingly applied. The court typically examines whether enforcing the obligation under the drastically altered circumstances would be unjust or oppressive. Courts evaluate each case to determine if the obligations should be revised, suspended, or extinguished under rebus sic stantibus. This principle is treated as an exception and is applied only when there is a drastic change in the circumstances upon which the parties originally based their agreement.

Practical Effects and Examples

1. Obligations to Deliver Goods: Suppose a contract requires a seller to deliver specific goods, but a sudden export ban renders this impossible. If the goods have lost their essential function due to unforeseen circumstances (such as a ban or a pandemic), rebus sic stantibus may extinguish the obligation.

2. Lease Contracts: If a lessee is forced to close their business due to unforeseen regulatory changes or an economic crisis, they may invoke rebus sic stantibus to seek relief from rental obligations. Philippine courts may grant relief if the lessee can prove that the circumstances were extraordinary and unforeseeable.

3. Construction Contracts: In a contract for a construction project, a sudden surge in material prices due to a national crisis or shortage could make fulfilling the contract at the agreed price financially unviable. The contractor may seek to revise the terms based on rebus sic stantibus principles, showing that the drastic price change was unforeseeable and beyond control.

Limits of the Doctrine

Despite its utility, rebus sic stantibus is limited by the principle of pacta sunt servanda, which means agreements must generally be kept. Courts require compelling evidence before excusing an obligation, as the judiciary prioritizes contractual stability and certainty. Merely unfavorable economic conditions, anticipated risks, or foreseeable difficulties do not qualify for the application of rebus sic stantibus.

Comparative Perspective

The doctrine’s application in Philippine civil law is more conservative compared to jurisdictions that recognize hardship clauses or force majeure provisions as routine parts of contracts. Unlike force majeure, which suspends or excuses performance for specific listed events, rebus sic stantibus can apply more broadly to any drastic and unforeseen change that fundamentally alters the contract's basis.

Summary of the Principle’s Effect on Obligations

The rebus sic stantibus principle allows for the extinguishment, suspension, or revision of obligations in cases where extraordinary, unforeseen circumstances fundamentally disrupt the contractual balance. Philippine courts apply this principle sparingly and focus on maintaining a balance between honoring agreements and preventing undue hardship caused by extraordinary changes.

Key Takeaways:

• Rebus sic stantibus is an exceptional principle that serves as a remedy when performance becomes extraordinarily difficult due to unforeseen changes.
• The principle finds legal footing in Articles 1266 and 1267 of the Philippine Civil Code.
• Its application requires proof of extraordinary, unforeseeable events that have fundamentally altered the contract’s nature.
• Courts strictly limit the doctrine’s application to avoid undermining the general rule of pacta sunt servanda, thereby preserving contract reliability.

This doctrine serves as an important safeguard, ensuring fairness and practicality in the fulfillment of obligations when confronted with truly extraordinary and unforeseen circumstances.

Presumption of Loss | Loss of the Thing Due | Extinguishment of Obligations | Obligations | OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS

CIVIL LAW: Extinguishment of Obligations - Loss of the Thing Due - Presumption of Loss

1. Introduction to Extinguishment of Obligations and Loss of the Thing Due

In Philippine civil law, obligations are extinguished by various causes, including the loss of the thing due. Article 1262 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides that obligations can be terminated if the thing required to fulfill the obligation is lost or destroyed. This topic falls under the general rules governing obligations and contracts in the Civil Code, specifically focusing on the presumptions surrounding the loss of the thing due, a subset of extinguishment of obligations.

2. Relevant Legal Basis: Article 1262 of the Civil Code

Article 1262 of the Civil Code states:

An obligation which consists in the delivery of a determinate thing shall be extinguished if it should be lost or destroyed without the fault of the debtor, and before he has incurred in delay.

This provision implies that, for an obligation to be extinguished by loss, three essential requisites must be met:

1. The Obligation Must Involve a Determinate Thing: The obligation must specifically identify the item or object to be delivered (e.g., a particular car with a specific make, model, and identification). If the object is generic (i.e., unspecified among similar objects), it cannot be extinguished by loss, as similar items could replace it.

2. The Loss Must Occur Without Fault on the Debtor's Part: If the debtor is responsible for the loss, the obligation is not extinguished, and the debtor may even be liable for damages.

3. The Loss Occurs Before the Debtor is in Delay: If the debtor has incurred delay, he or she may still be liable, despite the loss of the thing, as they are already considered in default.

3. Understanding "Loss of the Thing Due"

"Loss" under Article 1262 means the thing no longer exists or cannot fulfill the intended purpose of the obligation. This could occur due to:

• Physical Destruction – The object is irreparably destroyed (e.g., a house burns down).
• Legal Impossibility – The object cannot legally be delivered (e.g., confiscation by the government).
• Moral Impossibility – The item cannot serve its purpose even if it physically exists (e.g., artwork with significant historical value is destroyed).

4. Presumption of Loss under Civil Law

The Civil Code presumes loss in specific situations, creating a legal assumption that the object of the obligation is lost. This presumption is beneficial in situations where it is difficult to prove the exact status of the thing. The presumption operates under the following conditions:

a. Fortuitous Events or Force Majeure

The presumption of loss generally applies when the loss is due to a fortuitous event or force majeure. Article 1174 of the Civil Code provides that, generally, no person shall be liable for a fortuitous event, except:

• When expressly specified by law or agreement.
• When the nature of the obligation requires the assumption of risk.
• If the debtor was in delay.
• When the debtor was negligent.

Examples of fortuitous events include natural calamities (e.g., earthquakes, floods) or unforeseen human actions beyond the control of the parties (e.g., riots, wars). If these events cause the loss of the thing due, and the above conditions are met, it is presumed that the thing is lost, and the obligation is extinguished.

b. Loss While in Transit

If a thing is in transit and the risk of loss is transferred to the debtor (such as in a sale where the thing is delivered by sea), there may be a presumption of loss upon certain events, especially if there is no proof to the contrary and the loss was beyond the debtor’s control. However, the burden of proof that the thing was indeed lost lies with the debtor.

5. Consequences of the Presumption of Loss

a. Extinguishment of Obligation

If the presumption of loss is confirmed, the obligation is extinguished. The creditor cannot demand the object’s delivery nor claim damages, provided that:

• The debtor was not at fault.
• The debtor was not in delay.

b. Shifting the Burden of Proof

The presumption of loss can shift the burden of proof. Once the debtor proves circumstances that justify the presumption (e.g., a natural disaster), it falls on the creditor to prove otherwise if they believe the item was not lost or destroyed.

6. Exceptions to Extinguishment Due to Loss

Even when the presumption of loss is met, the obligation may not be extinguished in specific cases:

• Fault or Negligence: If the debtor is responsible for the loss, the obligation remains.
• Delay: If the debtor is already in delay, the presumption of loss does not apply, and the obligation persists.
• Indemnity Clauses: If a contract specifies that a debtor remains liable in cases of certain types of loss, the debtor may still be bound to compensate the creditor.
• Substitute Items (Genus): When the obligation involves generic or fungible goods, the obligation is not extinguished, as similar goods can fulfill the obligation.

7. Practical Applications and Illustrations

Example: A loan contract requires the delivery of a specific car (with particular VIN and license plate) to a creditor. If a typhoon destroys the car while stored in a secure garage, and the debtor is not at fault, the presumption of loss applies, extinguishing the obligation. However, if the debtor negligently left the car in an open area and the same typhoon destroyed it, the presumption of loss may not apply, making the debtor liable.

Case Law: Philippine jurisprudence supports the principle of extinguishment through loss without fault, applying the Civil Code’s provisions to similar cases involving destruction of property due to unforeseen events. However, courts have repeatedly held that the debtor’s responsibility may persist if evidence shows negligence, delay, or a violation of specific contractual obligations.

8. Conclusion

The presumption of loss under Philippine civil law serves as a fair safeguard for debtors, allowing them to be released from an obligation when a determinate item is lost without their fault. This principle strikes a balance between protecting debtors from unforeseeable events while ensuring that obligations are not lightly dismissed in cases of negligence, fault, or delay. In all cases, the surrounding circumstances and whether the debtor was at fault or in delay are essential factors. Legal practitioners must carefully assess these factors to ensure the appropriate application of the presumption of loss.

Effect of Loss on an Obligation | Loss of the Thing Due | Extinguishment of Obligations | Obligations | OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS

CIVIL LAW > OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS > OBLIGATIONS > EXTINCTION OF OBLIGATIONS > LOSS OF THE THING DUE > EFFECT OF LOSS ON AN OBLIGATION

---

I. Legal Basis and General Principle

The effect of loss on an obligation under Philippine civil law is primarily governed by Articles 1262 to 1269 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. In general, if the subject of the obligation (the thing due) is lost or destroyed without the fault of the debtor and before he is in default, the obligation is extinguished. This rule is based on the principle of res perit domino—that the loss is borne by the owner of the thing. Here, the obligation becomes impossible to perform, and the debtor is freed from liability.

---

II. Specific Provisions and Detailed Analysis

A. Requisites for Extinguishment due to Loss (Article 1262)

To extinguish an obligation because of loss, the following must be present:

1. The Thing Due Must Be a Specific or Determinate Thing

   • Only when the obligation involves a specific or determinate thing can the loss of the thing result in the extinguishment of the obligation. If the obligation pertains to a generic or indeterminate thing, it cannot be extinguished by loss as generic obligations are typically replaceable (genus nunquam perit—genus never perishes).

2. Loss Must Be Due to a Fortuitous Event

   • A fortuitous event refers to an unforeseeable event that cannot be resisted or avoided, including natural disasters, acts of war, and other causes beyond human control.
   • If the loss is due to the debtor’s fault or negligence, the obligation is not extinguished. In such cases, the debtor remains liable for damages as the loss is attributed to their fault.

3. Debtor Must Not Be in Delay

   • If the debtor is already in delay or default when the loss occurs, he is liable for the loss even if it arises from a fortuitous event, as the delay places the risk upon the debtor.

B. Effect of Loss in Different Scenarios

1. Loss Due to Fortuitous Event, No Debtor Delay (Article 1262)

   • If the thing is lost due to a fortuitous event and the debtor is not in delay, the obligation is extinguished, and the debtor has no further liability.

2. Loss Due to Debtor’s Fault or Negligence (Article 1263)

   • If the debtor is at fault for the loss of the specific thing, he is responsible for damages, and the obligation remains. This is true even if a fortuitous event later impacts the property, as the initial fault lies with the debtor.

3. Loss Due to Creditor’s Default (Article 1264)

   • If the creditor causes or contributes to the loss by refusing to accept delivery or otherwise, the risk of loss shifts to the creditor, and the debtor is relieved from liability.

4. Partial Loss (Article 1266)

   • When the thing is partially lost or damaged, the obligation may not be extinguished but rather reduced proportionally if it remains possible to fulfill the obligation.

C. Determination of Loss (Article 1262)

The law considers loss in three forms:

• Physical Loss: The thing no longer exists (e.g., destroyed by fire).
• Legal Loss: The thing is still in existence but can no longer be legally owned or delivered (e.g., expropriated by the government).
• Economic Loss: The thing has diminished in value such that it no longer serves its intended purpose.

---

III. Debtor’s Liability in Special Circumstances

A. Obligations to Deliver Generic Things (Article 1263)

If the obligation is to deliver a generic item, the loss does not extinguish the obligation, as generic items are presumed not to perish and can be replaced. The debtor must still fulfill the obligation by delivering another item of the same kind or quality.

B. Reciprocal Obligations (Article 1266)

When obligations are reciprocal (e.g., in a sale where the delivery of goods is met by payment), the loss of the thing due affects both parties:

• If the thing is lost through no fault of either party, the corresponding obligation of the other party (e.g., to pay for the thing) is also extinguished.

C. Impossibility of Performance (Article 1266)

If a thing becomes impossible to deliver for reasons beyond the debtor's control, the debtor may be excused from performing the obligation. However, if the impossibility arises after partial performance, proportional adjustments may apply.

---

IV. Effect of Loss in Alternative and Facultative Obligations

1. Alternative Obligations (Article 1267)

   • If an alternative obligation is involved, and one of the items becomes impossible to deliver, the debtor may deliver the alternative option, provided at least one choice remains possible. The obligation is only extinguished if all alternatives become impossible without the debtor's fault.

2. Facultative Obligations (Article 1268)

   • In a facultative obligation, where the debtor has the option to substitute the specific item with another, the loss of the original item does not extinguish the obligation since the substitute remains available.

---

V. Special Rule on Loss of the Thing in Lease and Sale (Specific Performance Contexts)

A. Lease

In lease contracts, if the leased property is lost through no fault of the lessee, the lease is terminated, and the lessee is relieved from future obligations. However, if the lessee is at fault, he may still be held liable for the loss.

B. Sale (Art. 1480)

In sales, the risk of loss transfers depending on who has control of the item. The general rule is that the buyer assumes the risk upon delivery. If the seller still holds the item, they may remain responsible for any loss not due to the buyer’s delay.

---

VI. Conclusion

The loss of the thing due affects obligations depending on the nature of the thing, cause of the loss, and the conduct of the debtor. Philippine civil law meticulously provides detailed conditions under which an obligation may be extinguished due to the loss of the thing owed, taking into account fairness between parties. The guiding principle remains that obligations become unenforceable when the subject matter of an obligation is destroyed without the debtor's fault or delay, balancing legal accountability with fairness.

Requisites | Loss of the Thing Due | Extinguishment of Obligations | Obligations | OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS

Under Philippine Civil Law, the extinguishment of obligations due to the "Loss of the Thing Due" is governed by the Civil Code, particularly under the general rules of obligations and contracts. This topic involves specific requisites and conditions that must be met for the loss of the thing due to extinguish an obligation. Below is a meticulous breakdown of the relevant legal provisions, requirements, and implications concerning the extinguishment of obligations by the loss of the thing due, per the Civil Code of the Philippines:

---

1. Definition and Scope

Under Article 1262 of the Civil Code, an obligation is extinguished when the thing that is the object of the obligation is lost or destroyed without the fault of the debtor and before he has incurred in delay, provided that the obligation involves a specific or determinate thing. This extinguishment applies only if the thing due is determinate and specific, meaning it is explicitly identified and unique, rather than fungible or generic.

2. Requisites for the Extinguishment of Obligation Due to Loss of the Thing Due

For an obligation to be extinguished due to the loss of the thing due, the following requisites must be strictly met:

a. The Thing Must Be a Specific or Determinate Thing

• The obligation must involve a determinate or specific thing, meaning it is distinct and identified in a way that it cannot be substituted with any other. For instance, if the obligation involves delivering a specific car with a particular VIN (vehicle identification number), this car is a determinate thing.
• If the obligation involves a generic or indeterminate thing (e.g., a generic car of a particular model), the loss of one car does not extinguish the obligation, as the debtor can substitute it with another.

b. The Thing Is Lost Without the Fault of the Debtor

• The loss or destruction of the thing must occur without any fault or negligence on the part of the debtor. If the debtor’s fault causes the loss, the obligation is not extinguished, and the debtor remains liable.
• For example, if a debtor is supposed to deliver a specific artwork, and it is lost due to accidental fire not attributable to his fault, the obligation is extinguished. However, if the debtor negligently caused the fire, the obligation is not extinguished, and he may be held liable.

c. The Loss Occurs Before the Debtor Is in Delay

• The loss of the thing must occur before the debtor incurs delay. According to the Civil Code, a debtor is in delay if he fails to fulfill his obligation upon demand by the creditor when the time for performance has already arrived.
• If the thing is lost after the debtor is already in delay, the obligation is not extinguished, and the debtor remains liable. This is based on the principle that the debtor bears the risk of loss once he is in delay.

d. No Substitute or Replacement Available (for Determinate Thing)

• Because the obligation involves a specific thing, the principle of substitution is not applicable. The object lost cannot simply be replaced by an equivalent as it is unique. This condition reinforces the necessity of the thing’s uniqueness to invoke this extinguishment rule.

3. When is a Thing Considered "Lost"?

Under the Civil Code, a thing is considered "lost" when:

• It perishes completely or is destroyed in a manner that it can no longer be delivered.
• It goes out of commerce, meaning it becomes legally unavailable for trade or cannot be delivered as per the legal standards.
• It disappears in such a way that its existence is unknown or it is irretrievable, as when a ship sinks and cannot be salvaged.

4. Effects of the Loss of the Thing Due

When the above requisites are met and the thing is lost, the following legal effects apply:

a. Extinguishment of the Obligation

• The obligation is extinguished, and the debtor is released from his duty to deliver the lost thing. This discharge is absolute when all requisites are satisfied.

b. Exceptions to Extinguishment Due to Loss

The obligation may not be extinguished even if the specific thing is lost under the following conditions:

1. When the law expressly provides otherwise.

   • Certain provisions in special laws may dictate that the loss of the thing does not extinguish the obligation, particularly in cases involving public interest.

2. When the parties have stipulated otherwise.

   • If the parties expressly agree that the debtor will bear the risk of loss, even if the thing perishes without his fault, the debtor remains liable despite the loss.

3. When the obligation arises from a crime or quasi-delict (tort).

   • In obligations arising from a criminal act or quasi-delict, liability may persist regardless of the loss of the thing. This often involves cases where restitution is part of the punishment or civil liability.

4. When the debtor incurs in delay.

   • As previously noted, if the thing is lost after the debtor has already incurred in delay, the debtor bears the risk of loss, and the obligation is not extinguished.

5. If the debtor promised to deliver the same thing to two or more persons who do not have the same interest.

   • In cases of conflicting multiple obligations for the same specific thing, the obligation to one of the creditors may not necessarily be extinguished, depending on the circumstances and timing.

5. Illustrative Applications of Article 1262

• Example 1: A debtor obliges himself to deliver a specific racehorse to a creditor. Before the due date of delivery, the horse dies from natural causes. The obligation to deliver the horse is extinguished.
• Example 2: A debtor is supposed to deliver a valuable painting but fails to do so on the agreed date. While the painting is with the debtor, it is accidentally damaged by a third party. Since the debtor was already in delay, he bears the risk and may still be liable to the creditor.

6. Concept of Risk in the Loss of a Specific Thing

Philippine Civil Law adopts the principle of res perit domino ("the thing perishes with its owner"). This means that if the thing perishes without the debtor’s fault and without delay, the creditor who is the ultimate owner bears the risk of loss, leading to the extinguishment of the obligation.

---

Summary

The extinguishment of obligations by the loss of the thing due is strictly applied under the conditions outlined in the Civil Code, particularly Article 1262. The critical elements involve the uniqueness of the thing (it must be specific or determinate), absence of fault by the debtor, the loss occurring before the debtor’s delay, and lack of any conflicting laws or stipulations to the contrary.

Concept of Loss | Loss of the Thing Due | Extinguishment of Obligations | Obligations | OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS

Topic: Civil Law - Extinguishment of Obligations - Loss of the Thing Due (Concept of Loss)

---

Overview

In Philippine Civil Law, the concept of loss as an extinguishment of obligations is governed by the principles outlined in the Civil Code of the Philippines, specifically under the Title on Obligations and Contracts. When the object of an obligation (the “thing due”) is lost, the obligation may be extinguished under certain conditions. The provisions detail the circumstances under which loss occurs, the effects on the obligor’s liability, and exceptions where loss does not extinguish the obligation.

I. Definition of Loss (Article 1189 and Related Provisions)

The Civil Code defines loss as a situation where the object of the obligation perishes, goes out of commerce, or disappears in such a way that its existence is unknown or cannot be recovered. For an obligation to be extinguished due to loss, it must be shown that the loss is:

1. Physical Loss: The object is destroyed or perishes entirely.
2. Legal Loss: The object is removed from commerce by legal means (e.g., prohibitions or restrictions).
3. Civil Loss: The object disappears, and its existence or recovery is uncertain (e.g., lost with no hope of recovery).

The law requires proof that the thing is no longer recoverable, and any ambiguity is generally construed against the party seeking to be excused from performance.

II. Effects of Loss on Obligations (Article 1262)

The Civil Code stipulates that the loss of the thing due extinguishes the obligation if it occurs without the fault of the obligor and before they are in default. Key conditions and exceptions affect this principle:

1. Loss Without Fault: When the object of the obligation is lost due to an accident or force majeure and the obligor is not at fault, the obligation is extinguished. The obligor is no longer bound to deliver or perform concerning the lost item.

2. Loss With Fault: If the obligor is at fault (e.g., negligence) or if the loss occurs after they are in default, they remain liable for damages. They cannot use the loss as an excuse for non-performance. The injured party can either demand damages equivalent to the thing’s value or, in some cases, request a substitute.

3. Risk of Loss (Periculum Rei): For obligations to deliver a specific thing, the risk of loss typically shifts to the obligor unless otherwise agreed. The obligor bears the risk until the point of delivery, and any loss that occurs in their custody generally results in extinguishment of the obligation, provided there is no fault or default.

III. Specific Application of Loss in Obligations to Give a Specific or Determinate Thing (Article 1263)

An obligation to deliver a specific or determinate object (one clearly identified at the time the obligation is created) is extinguished upon the object’s loss, assuming no fault of the obligor. This principle does not extend to generic or indeterminate objects, as they are inherently replaceable. Thus, if an obligor fails to deliver a generic object, they must provide another of the same kind and quality.

IV. Cases and Circumstances Affecting Loss

1. Loss Due to Fortuitous Events (Force Majeure): A fortuitous event (e.g., natural disaster, war) generally exempts the obligor from liability, provided the event was unforeseeable and unavoidable and there was no fault on their part. However, certain obligations, particularly those related to public service or those with indemnity clauses, may hold the obligor liable even in cases of force majeure.

2. Loss After Demand or Default: If an obligee demands performance, and the obligor does not comply (default), any subsequent loss—even by fortuitous event—will not extinguish the obligation. The obligor is still liable for damages or specific performance based on the obligation’s nature.

3. Mutual Agreement and Stipulation (Waivers and Clauses): Parties may agree on certain stipulations in the contract regarding loss, including who bears the risk of loss or terms that would require indemnity. If the contract provides specific provisions for loss, these terms prevail.

4. Obligations to Do and Not to Do: Loss applies only to obligations to deliver things. Obligations to do (services) or not to do (restrictions) are treated differently; the impossibility of performance in these cases (e.g., death of a performer) may extinguish the obligation.

V. Exceptions Where Loss Does Not Extinguish the Obligation (Article 1268)

The Civil Code provides that loss does not extinguish an obligation if:

1. The obligor was in default when the loss occurred.
2. The obligor assumed the risk of loss, either explicitly in the contract or by nature of the obligation (e.g., insurable interests).
3. The law specifically mandates liability, as in cases where a contract specifies that the obligor remains responsible regardless of the loss’s cause.

VI. Remedies for the Obligee When Loss Occurs with Fault

If loss occurs due to the obligor’s fault or after they are in default, the obligee may:

1. Demand indemnification for damages, calculated based on the lost object’s value, including any consequential damages arising from the non-performance.
2. In some cases, claim specific performance if substitute performance is possible (e.g., a new specific item or an equivalent).

VII. Practical Applications in Philippine Law

In Philippine jurisprudence, courts examine the circumstances of each case meticulously to determine whether loss extinguishes an obligation. Case law typically focuses on:

• Determining the obligor’s fault.
• Assessing the existence of fortuitous events.
• Evaluating the presence of stipulations regarding risk allocation. Courts have emphasized that obligations with a specific and determinable object are inherently more susceptible to being extinguished upon loss, while generic obligations persist until performance is feasible.

VIII. Summary

The concept of loss as an extinguishment of obligations in Philippine law underscores the principle that obligations related to specific things may be extinguished if the thing is lost without the obligor’s fault. Fault, risk, and default play crucial roles in determining whether obligations end upon loss or if liability persists. Legal practitioners must assess contract stipulations, fault analysis, and applicable force majeure clauses when advising on or litigating matters of loss and extinguishment of obligations.

Loss of the Thing Due | Extinguishment of Obligations | Obligations | OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS

CIVIL LAW > V. OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS > A. Obligations > 5. Extinguishment of Obligations > b. Loss of the Thing Due

Under Philippine law, the concept of extinguishment of obligations by the loss of the thing due is covered by the Civil Code of the Philippines, specifically in Articles 1262 to 1269. This principle addresses the circumstances where an obligation, especially one that involves a specific or determinate thing, can be extinguished due to the loss or destruction of the thing itself. This is particularly significant in obligations involving unique or specific objects that cannot simply be replaced or substituted.

1. General Principle and Legal Foundation

• Article 1262 of the Civil Code establishes that when the object of an obligation, specifically a determinate thing, is lost or destroyed without the fault of the obligor and before the obligor is in delay, the obligation is extinguished.
• Determinate Thing: In this context, a determinate thing refers to a specific, unique object that has been clearly identified in the obligation. A generic or fungible item, which can be replaced by another of the same kind, does not fall under the same rule.
• This extinguishment relieves the obligor from fulfilling the obligation as it is rendered impossible due to circumstances beyond their control.

2. Conditions for Extinguishment by Loss of the Thing Due

For the loss of a thing due to extinguish an obligation, the following conditions must be met:

• Thing is determinate: The object must be a specific and identified item. Obligations involving generic things are not extinguished by their loss because generic items can generally be replaced.
• Loss without fault of the debtor: The debtor must not be at fault for the loss. If the loss is attributable to the debtor’s negligence or fault, the debtor remains liable to fulfill the obligation or compensate for the loss.
• No delay (default) on the part of the debtor: If the debtor is in mora or delay in fulfilling the obligation, the obligation is not extinguished by the loss of the thing. In such cases, the debtor may still be held liable despite the loss.

3. Definition of Loss

• Under Article 1263, "loss" occurs when the thing perishes, goes out of commerce, or disappears in such a way that it cannot be recovered.
• Total Loss: Complete destruction of the object, rendering it impossible for anyone to possess or use.
• Partial Loss: When the thing is not entirely destroyed but is impaired or diminished in value. In partial loss, the creditor may have the right to demand performance with a reduction in the price or, if not viable, opt to consider the obligation extinguished depending on the circumstances.

4. Rules on Fortuitous Events

• Article 1262 of the Civil Code generally excuses the obligor from fulfilling the obligation if the loss of the thing occurs due to a fortuitous event or force majeure, provided there is no fault on the part of the obligor.
• Fortuitous Event: This refers to unforeseen events or circumstances beyond human control, such as natural disasters, accidents, or acts of war, which prevent the obligor from fulfilling their duty.

5. When Loss Does Not Extinguish Obligation

There are specific cases where the loss of the thing does not lead to the extinguishment of the obligation, including:

• Debtor’s Fault or Negligence: If the thing is lost due to the debtor’s fault, the obligation is not extinguished, and the debtor is liable for damages.
• Debtor in Delay (Mora): If the debtor is in default or delay at the time of loss, the obligation is not extinguished, and the debtor may still be liable.
• Stipulations by the Parties: If the parties have explicitly agreed in the contract that the loss of the thing does not extinguish the obligation, such stipulations prevail, and the obligation is not extinguished.

6. Effect of Partial Loss

• In cases of partial loss, the creditor may choose to enforce the obligation despite the diminished value or demand a corresponding reduction in what is owed. If the partial loss substantially impairs the thing’s use or value to the creditor, the obligation may be extinguished if agreed upon or under judicial determination.

7. Specific Examples in Case Law

• Case Law Applications: Philippine jurisprudence provides several interpretations of Article 1262, clarifying situations where obligations are extinguished by loss. Courts have ruled in various instances on whether specific losses qualify as fortuitous events, particularly examining the role of foreseeability and debtor’s control.
• Burden of Proof: The obligor bears the burden of proving that the loss was due to a fortuitous event and that they were not at fault.

8. Obligations Involving Fungible or Generic Things

• Obligations concerning generic items are not extinguished by the loss of a specific thing since generic things can generally be replaced. As per Article 1263, if the debtor is bound to deliver a generic thing, they are still required to fulfill the obligation by delivering an equivalent item.

9. Exception - Cases Involving Subrogation and Insurance

• In certain instances, especially in obligations involving insurance, the loss of the thing may not extinguish the debtor’s obligation. For example, if an object insured by the creditor is lost, the obligation to pay may be subrogated to the insurance provider.

10. Rescission and Right of Redemption in Loss Cases

• If a partially damaged object is deemed to still have value to the creditor, the latter may demand rescission, allowing the creditor to recover what remains or to seek damages. This is typically applicable in obligations where partial performance still benefits the creditor.

11. Application to Different Types of Obligations

• Pure and Conditional Obligations: In conditional obligations, if the condition of the obligation is not fulfilled due to the loss of the thing, the obligation is extinguished.
• Obligations with a Penal Clause: In obligations that contain a penal clause, if the thing is lost through a fortuitous event, the penal clause may also be extinguished unless the penal clause explicitly covers such events.

In conclusion, under Philippine law, the loss of the thing due extinguishes an obligation if it meets the specific conditions outlined in the Civil Code, ensuring fairness in situations where fulfilling an obligation becomes impossible. This doctrine protects debtors in good faith from liability when performance becomes unfeasible due to unavoidable or unforeseen circumstances. However, debtors are not relieved of their obligations if loss arises from their fault, negligence, or delay, preserving the creditor's rights under such circumstances.