SOURCES OF OBLIGATIONS - 913 PJP 21 (2021)
Article 1157 of the Civil Code of the Philippines (NCC) provides the sources of an obligation. Thus provided, obligations arise from (a) law; (b) contracts; (c) quasi-contracts; (d) acts or omissions punished by law; and (e) quasi-delicts.
Law is a source of obligations. Obligations arise when imposed by the law
itself and such cannot be presumed.[1]
For example, an obligation arising from law is the payment of taxes.
Contracts are a source of obligations. Obligations arise from the stipulation
of the parties; it has the force of law and should be complied with in good
faith.[2] For example, a contract of sale
between a buyer and a seller in which the obligation arises must be respected
by both parties.
Quasi-contracts are a source of obligations. Certain lawful, voluntary and
unilateral acts give rise to the juridical relation of quasi-contract[3]
to the end that no one shall be unjustly enriched or benefited at the expense
of another.[4] For example, X owes from Y
Php1,000.00. By mistake, X paid Y Php2,000.00. Y, now, must return the excess
payment because there has been a mistake. This is called
solutio indebiti and it is founded on a basic principle of human
relations that no person shall be unjustly enriched at the expense of
another.
Acts or omissions punishable by law, also known as delicts, are a source of
obligations. For example, a person who killed another is liable to pay damages
to the heirs of the latter because every person criminally liable for a felony
is also civilly liable.[5] Also, under
the Revised Penal Code (RPC) theft is prohibited and punishable. If anyone
commits such a crime, s/he will have the obligation to pay damages to the
private complaining party and a fine to the Philippine Government as may be
imposed by the court, not to mention the deprivation of his/her liberty.
An obligation arising from delict is different from that arising from quasi-delict. Responsibility for fault or negligence under a quasi-delict[6] is entirely separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence under the penal code. However, the plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission of the defendant.[7]
Quasi-delicts, or acts or omissions causing damages to another through fault or negligence, are a source of obligations. Obligations arise from damages caused to another through an act or omission, there being fault or negligence but without any contractual relations existing between the parties.[8] For example, X broke the car window of Y while playing basketball. In this case, X should pay damages for the injuries caused to Y due to X’s negligent act.
Of course, in the given example above, Y could pursue a criminal action for reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property. In such a case, the obligation is primarily criminal in nature, thus relying on Article 100 of the RPC. If, however, Y opts to pursue an action for damages, the obligation is purely civil in nature as it is based on the law on quasi-delicts.
[1] CIVIL CODE, Article 1158.
[2] CIVIL CODE, Article 1159.
[3] METROBANK v. ABSOLUTE MANAGEMENT, 701 Phil. 200 (G.R. No. 170498, January 09, 2013) [Per J. Brion, Second Divison].
[4] CIVIL CODE, Article 2142.
[5] REVISED PENAL CODE, Article 100.
[6] CIVIL CODE, Article 2176.
[7] CIVIL CODE, Article 2177.
[8] CIVIL CODE, Article 2176.