Problem — A, B and C borrowed P12,000 from X on June 1, 1966.

They executed a promissory note

binding themselves jointly and severally to pay the obligation on June 1, 1968. For failure to pay, X
brought an action against A for payment of the entire obligation plus interests. A interposed the
following defenses:
(1) that B was only a minor at the time of the celebration of the contract and that such fact was known
to X; and
(2) that X had granted an extension of two years to C within which to pay.
(1) Can A avail himself of these defenses?
(2) Granting that A can avail himself of these defenses, what would be the effect upon his liability,
assuming that he can establish both defenses by competent evidence? Reasons.
Answer — (a) A can avail himself of these defenses. Under Art. 1222 of the Civil Code, there are three
kinds of defenses which are available to a solidary debtor if the creditor proceeds against him alone for
payment of the entire obligation. They are: fi rst, defenses derived from the nature of the obligation;
second, defenses personal to him or pertaining to his share; and third, defenses personal to the others,
but only as regards that part of the debt for which the latter are responsible. It is evident that both
defenses interposed by A fall within the purview of the third.
(b) Since A can avail himself of both defenses, and since such defenses are not absolute but merely
partial in character, undoubtedly, X can collect from A the following: (a) P4,000 corresponding to the
share of A in the obligation; and (b) an amount equivalent to the extent that B had been benefitted by
his share in the obligation, applying the rule enunciated in Art. 1399 regarding the effect if the defect of
a contract consists in the incapacity of one of the contracting parties. As far as the share corresponding
to C is concerned, X must wait for the expiration of the two years extension which he had given to C
before he can collect such share from A.
These are: first, when the obligation expressly stipulates the contrary, second, when the different
prestations constituting the objects of the obligation are subject to different terms and conditions; and
third, when the obligation is in part liquidated and in part unliquidated.