Problem No. 1.

— A, B, and C executed a promissory note binding themselves to pay P9,000 to X, Y,

and Z. The note is now due and demandable.
(a) Can the creditors proceed against A alone for payment of the entire obligation? Why?
(b) Can X alone proceed against A, B and C for payment of the entire obligation? Why?
(c) Suppose that X proceeds against A alone for payment, how much can he collect? Why?
(d) Suppose that C is insolvent, can A and B be held liable for his share in the obligations? Why?
(e) Suppose that the obligation was about to prescribe, but X wrote a letter to A demanding for
payment of the entire debt, will this have the effect of interrupting the running of the period of
prescription? Why?
Answer — (a) The creditors cannot proceed against A alone for the payment of the entire obligation.
Since the promissory note is silent with respect to the right of the creditors as well as the liability of
the debtors, the obligation is, therefore, presumedto be joint (Art. 1207, CC). Consequently, the only
right of such creditors if they proceed against A alone for payment would be to collect from him
P3,000, which is his proportionate share in the obligation. (Ibid.) Once the amount is collected, it will
then be divided equally among X, Y and Z. This is so because, under the law, in the absence of any
legal provision or stipulation of the parties to the contrary, the credit or debt shall be presumed to be
divided into as many equal shares as there are creditors or debtors, the creditors or debts being
considered distinct from one another (Art. 1208, CC).
(b) X alone cannot proceed against A, B and C for the payment of the entire obligation for the same
reason stated in the previous paragraph. The most that he will be able to collect from the three debtors
will be his proportionate share in the obligation which is P3,000 (Arts. 1207, 1208, CC). As far as the
debtors are concerned, because of the principle that in joint obligations the credit or debt shall be
presumed to be divided into as many equal shares as there are creditors or debtors, the credits or
debts being considered distinct from one another (Art. 1208, CC), the liability of each will be only
with respect to his share in the P9,000. Consequently, X can collect only P1,000 from A, P1,000 from
B, and P1,000 from C.
(c) If X proceeds against A alone for payment, the most that he will be able to collect will be only
P1,000. The reason has already been stated in the previous paragraph.
(d) If C is insolvent, his co-debtors cannot be held liable for his share in the obligations. This
necessarily follows from the principle that in joint obligation, the credit or debt shall be presumed to
be divided into as many equal shares as there are creditors or debtors, the credits or debts being
considered distinct from one another (Art. 1208, CC).
(e) The demand made by X upon A, for the purpose of interrupting the running of the period of
prescription, shall prejudice the latter only, but not the other debtors. Consequently, if after ten years,
X, Y and Z should bring an action against A, B and C to collect the debt, the defense of prescription
would be absolute insofar as B and C are concerned, but partial insofar as A is concerned. In other
words, A can still be compelled to pay P1,000 to X. The reason for this is the fact that the principle
of mutual agency is not applicable in joint obligations. (Agoncillo vs. Javier, 38 Phil. 424.)