2. If made with the knowledge of the debtor. – The payer shall have
   the rights of reimbursement and subrogation, that is, to recover
   what he has paid (not necessarily the amount of the debt) and to
   acquire all the rights of the creditor. (Arts. 1236, par. 2; 1237,
   1302,1303. )
Examples:
   D owes C the sum of P1,000.00. If S, a stranger to the obligation,
   offers to pay C, the latter may or may not accept the offer
   payment. Suppose C accepts, the right of S to recover from D
   depends upon whether the payment is with or without the
   knowledge or consent of D.
         1. Without the knowledge or against the will of D. – If the
   actual indebtedness is P1,000.00 and S paid P1,000.00, he can
   ask reimbursement for P1,000.00 but if P400.00 has already
   been paid by D, then S is entitled to be reimbursed only for the
   amount of P600.00 because it is only to that amount that D has
   been benefited. S can recover P400.00 from C who should not
   have accepted it.
   If C acted in bad faith, he is liable also for interest in leiu of
   damages.
2. With the knowledge of D. – In either case, if
  the payment of P1,000.00 was made with the
  knowledge or consent of D, S can recover from
  D P1,000.00 with all the rights of subrogation
  to the accessory obligations such as mortgage,
  guaranty, or penalty. (Art.1237.)
ART. 1237.
Whoever pays on behalf of the debtor without
 the knowledge or against the will or the latter
 cannot compel the creditor to subrogate him
 in his rights, such as those arising from a
 mortgage, guaranty, or penalty.(1159a)
Right of third person to subrogation
    Whoever pays on behalf of the debtor is
entitle to subrogation if the payment is with the
consent of the latter.(Art. 1237, 1302[2].) if the
payment is without the knowledge are against
the will of the debtor, the third person cannot
compel the creditor to subrogate him in the
latter’s accessory right of mortgage, guaranty, or
penalty.
    Legal subrogation by operation of law is
presumed in certain cases. (see Art. 1302.)
ART. 1238.
Payment made by a third person who does not
  intend to be reimbursed by the debtor is
  deemed to be a donation, which requires the
  debtor’s consent. But the payment is in any
  case valid as to the creditor who has accepted
  it. (n)
Payment by a third person who does
     not intend to be reimbursed
         Article 1238 “embodies the idea that no one should be compelled to
   accept the generosity of another.” (Report of the Code Commission, p.
   132.) If the paying third person does not intend to be reimbursed, the
   payment is deemed a donation which requires the debtor’s consent to be
   valid. (see Art. 725.)
         However, if the creditor accepts the payment, its shall be valid as to
   him and the payor although the debtor did not give his consent to the
   donation.
EXAMPLE:
         D owes C P1,000.00. Without the intention of being reimbursed, S
   paid D’s obligation. D had previously accepted S’s generosity.
         In the case, D is not liable to S and his obligation is extinguished. But
   if D did not consent to the donation, S may recover from D since there has
   been no donation, although originally S did not intend to be reimbursed.
   Nevertheless, the obligation of D to C is extinguished because the
   payment is valid as to C who has accepted it.
ART. 123.
      In obligations to give, payment made by
 one who does not have the free disposal of
 the thing due and capacity to alienate it shall
 not be valid, without prejudice to the
 provisions of article 1427 under the Title on
 “Natural Obligations.” (1160a)
Meaning of “free disposal of thing
    due” and “capacity to alienate.”
1. Free disposal of the thing due means that the
  thing to be delivered must not be subject to
  any claim or lien or encumbrance(e.g.,
  mortgage, pledge) of a third person.
2. Capacity to alienate means that the person is
  not incapacitated to enter into contracts (Arts.
  1327,1329.) and for that matter, to make a
  disposition of the thing due.
Free disposal of thing due and capacity
         to alienate required.
        As general rule, in obligations to give, payment by one who does
 not have the free disposition of the thing due and capacity to alienate
 it is not valid.* this means that the thing paid can be recovered.
        The exception is provided in Article 1427. The creditor cannot be
 compelled to accept payment where the person paying has no capacity
 to make it.
        Examples:
 1. S agreed to sell to B a television set. If the television delivered to B by S belongs
 to C, the same can be recovered by C because the payment is not valid. S does not
 have free disposal of the television set.
        The same right of recovery exists although the television set belongs to S if
 he is a minor and, therefore, has no capacity to alienate it.

 2. Under Article 1427, if S is a minor between 18 and 21 years, and he voluntarily
 pays a sum of money or delivers a fungible thing (like rice) to B in fulfillment of his
 obligation, there shall be no right to recover the same from B in case the latter has
 spent or consumed it in good faith.
ART. 1240. Payment shall be made to the person
 in whose favor the obligation has been
 constituted, or his successor in interest, or any
 person authorized to receive it. (1162a)
Person to whom payment shall be
                  made.
Payment shall be made to:
1. The creditor or obligee (person in whose favor obligation has been
    constituted);
2. His successor in interest (like an heir or assignee); or
3. Any person authorized to receive it.
The creditor referred to must be the creditor at the time the payment
    is to be made, not at the constitution of the obligation. Hence, if a
    person is subrogated to the right of the creditor, payment should be
    made to the new creditor.
Example:
D owes C P1,000.00. In this case, D must pay C or any person authorized by C or in
   case of his death, his heirs or any person authorized by law. Payment to any other
   person is not valid except as provided in Article 1241, paragraph 2.
That D acted in good faith in paying to the wrong party is not an excuse.
Meaning of “any person authorized to receive it.”
  As used in Article 1240, it means not only person
  authorized by the creditor, but also a person
  authorized by law to receive the payment, such s
  guardian, executor or administrator of the estate of a
  deceased, and assignee or liquidator of a partnership
  or corporation as well as any other person who maybe
  authorized to do so by law. (Haw Pia vs. China Banking
  Corporation, 80 Phil. 604.)
Under Article 1242, payment in good faith to any person
  in possession of the credit is valid although such
  person may not be authorized to receive the payment.
ART. 1241. Payment to a person who is incapacitated to
  administer his property shall be valid if he has kept
  the thing delivered, or insofar as the payment has
  been beneficial to him.
  Payment made to a third person shall also be valid
  insofar as it has redounded to the benefit of the
  creditor. Such benefit to the creditor need not be
  proved in the following case:`
  1. If after the payment, the third person acquires the creditor’s
  rights;
  2. If the creditor ratifies the payment to the third person;
  3. If by the creditor’s conduct, the debtor has been led to believe
  that the third person had authority to receive the payment. (1163a)
Effect of payment to an incapacitated
               person.
Payment to a person incapacitated to administer or
   manage his property is not valid unless such
   incapacitated person kept the thing paid or
   delivered (so that it is not necessary that it should
   have been invested in some profitable venture),
   or was benefited by the payment.
In the absence of this benefit, the debtor may be
   made to pay again by the creditor’s guardian or
   by the incapacitated person himself

Law 1

  • 2.
    2. If madewith the knowledge of the debtor. – The payer shall have the rights of reimbursement and subrogation, that is, to recover what he has paid (not necessarily the amount of the debt) and to acquire all the rights of the creditor. (Arts. 1236, par. 2; 1237, 1302,1303. ) Examples: D owes C the sum of P1,000.00. If S, a stranger to the obligation, offers to pay C, the latter may or may not accept the offer payment. Suppose C accepts, the right of S to recover from D depends upon whether the payment is with or without the knowledge or consent of D. 1. Without the knowledge or against the will of D. – If the actual indebtedness is P1,000.00 and S paid P1,000.00, he can ask reimbursement for P1,000.00 but if P400.00 has already been paid by D, then S is entitled to be reimbursed only for the amount of P600.00 because it is only to that amount that D has been benefited. S can recover P400.00 from C who should not have accepted it. If C acted in bad faith, he is liable also for interest in leiu of damages.
  • 3.
    2. With theknowledge of D. – In either case, if the payment of P1,000.00 was made with the knowledge or consent of D, S can recover from D P1,000.00 with all the rights of subrogation to the accessory obligations such as mortgage, guaranty, or penalty. (Art.1237.)
  • 4.
    ART. 1237. Whoever payson behalf of the debtor without the knowledge or against the will or the latter cannot compel the creditor to subrogate him in his rights, such as those arising from a mortgage, guaranty, or penalty.(1159a)
  • 5.
    Right of thirdperson to subrogation Whoever pays on behalf of the debtor is entitle to subrogation if the payment is with the consent of the latter.(Art. 1237, 1302[2].) if the payment is without the knowledge are against the will of the debtor, the third person cannot compel the creditor to subrogate him in the latter’s accessory right of mortgage, guaranty, or penalty. Legal subrogation by operation of law is presumed in certain cases. (see Art. 1302.)
  • 6.
    ART. 1238. Payment madeby a third person who does not intend to be reimbursed by the debtor is deemed to be a donation, which requires the debtor’s consent. But the payment is in any case valid as to the creditor who has accepted it. (n)
  • 7.
    Payment by athird person who does not intend to be reimbursed Article 1238 “embodies the idea that no one should be compelled to accept the generosity of another.” (Report of the Code Commission, p. 132.) If the paying third person does not intend to be reimbursed, the payment is deemed a donation which requires the debtor’s consent to be valid. (see Art. 725.) However, if the creditor accepts the payment, its shall be valid as to him and the payor although the debtor did not give his consent to the donation. EXAMPLE: D owes C P1,000.00. Without the intention of being reimbursed, S paid D’s obligation. D had previously accepted S’s generosity. In the case, D is not liable to S and his obligation is extinguished. But if D did not consent to the donation, S may recover from D since there has been no donation, although originally S did not intend to be reimbursed. Nevertheless, the obligation of D to C is extinguished because the payment is valid as to C who has accepted it.
  • 8.
    ART. 123. In obligations to give, payment made by one who does not have the free disposal of the thing due and capacity to alienate it shall not be valid, without prejudice to the provisions of article 1427 under the Title on “Natural Obligations.” (1160a)
  • 9.
    Meaning of “freedisposal of thing due” and “capacity to alienate.” 1. Free disposal of the thing due means that the thing to be delivered must not be subject to any claim or lien or encumbrance(e.g., mortgage, pledge) of a third person. 2. Capacity to alienate means that the person is not incapacitated to enter into contracts (Arts. 1327,1329.) and for that matter, to make a disposition of the thing due.
  • 10.
    Free disposal ofthing due and capacity to alienate required. As general rule, in obligations to give, payment by one who does not have the free disposition of the thing due and capacity to alienate it is not valid.* this means that the thing paid can be recovered. The exception is provided in Article 1427. The creditor cannot be compelled to accept payment where the person paying has no capacity to make it. Examples: 1. S agreed to sell to B a television set. If the television delivered to B by S belongs to C, the same can be recovered by C because the payment is not valid. S does not have free disposal of the television set. The same right of recovery exists although the television set belongs to S if he is a minor and, therefore, has no capacity to alienate it. 2. Under Article 1427, if S is a minor between 18 and 21 years, and he voluntarily pays a sum of money or delivers a fungible thing (like rice) to B in fulfillment of his obligation, there shall be no right to recover the same from B in case the latter has spent or consumed it in good faith.
  • 11.
    ART. 1240. Paymentshall be made to the person in whose favor the obligation has been constituted, or his successor in interest, or any person authorized to receive it. (1162a)
  • 12.
    Person to whompayment shall be made. Payment shall be made to: 1. The creditor or obligee (person in whose favor obligation has been constituted); 2. His successor in interest (like an heir or assignee); or 3. Any person authorized to receive it. The creditor referred to must be the creditor at the time the payment is to be made, not at the constitution of the obligation. Hence, if a person is subrogated to the right of the creditor, payment should be made to the new creditor. Example: D owes C P1,000.00. In this case, D must pay C or any person authorized by C or in case of his death, his heirs or any person authorized by law. Payment to any other person is not valid except as provided in Article 1241, paragraph 2. That D acted in good faith in paying to the wrong party is not an excuse.
  • 13.
    Meaning of “anyperson authorized to receive it.” As used in Article 1240, it means not only person authorized by the creditor, but also a person authorized by law to receive the payment, such s guardian, executor or administrator of the estate of a deceased, and assignee or liquidator of a partnership or corporation as well as any other person who maybe authorized to do so by law. (Haw Pia vs. China Banking Corporation, 80 Phil. 604.) Under Article 1242, payment in good faith to any person in possession of the credit is valid although such person may not be authorized to receive the payment.
  • 14.
    ART. 1241. Paymentto a person who is incapacitated to administer his property shall be valid if he has kept the thing delivered, or insofar as the payment has been beneficial to him. Payment made to a third person shall also be valid insofar as it has redounded to the benefit of the creditor. Such benefit to the creditor need not be proved in the following case:` 1. If after the payment, the third person acquires the creditor’s rights; 2. If the creditor ratifies the payment to the third person; 3. If by the creditor’s conduct, the debtor has been led to believe that the third person had authority to receive the payment. (1163a)
  • 15.
    Effect of paymentto an incapacitated person. Payment to a person incapacitated to administer or manage his property is not valid unless such incapacitated person kept the thing paid or delivered (so that it is not necessary that it should have been invested in some profitable venture), or was benefited by the payment. In the absence of this benefit, the debtor may be made to pay again by the creditor’s guardian or by the incapacitated person himself