Case Digest: Un Pak Leung vs Nigorra, 9 Phil 381, G.R. No. L-3128

Un Pak Leung vs Nigorra, 9 Phil 381, GR No. L-3128, December 19, 1907

Subject: Obligations and Contracts

FACTS

On December 2, 1905, during the trial of the cause, the judge of CF found that the defendants were indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of P443.35 and rendered a judgment against the defendants and in favor of the plaintiff for the said sum, including the said costs incurred in the CFI. From this decision, only the defendant, Juan Nigorra, appealed to SC, after having made a motion for a new trial in the lower court, and made six assignments of error. All of these assignments of error, except the sixth, relate to the sufficiency of the proof adduced during the trial of the cause in the lower court.

The sixth assignment of error made by the appellant, Juan Nigorra, is "that the lower court committed an error in decreeing that both of the defendants "como razon social," and each of them were individually liable for the payment of the amount claimed by the plaintiff." The lower court found as a fact from the proof adduced during the trial of the cause that the defendants were partners in the management of the bakery La Isleña and from this finding of facts held that the defendants were jointly and individually liable for the payment of the sum claimed by the plaintiff.

ISSUE

Whether or not they are jointly responsible.

RULING

Yes, they are jointly liable.

Under the law (Art 1207), the concurrence of two or more creditors or of two or more debtors in one and the same obligation does not imply that each one of the former has a right to demand, or that each one of the latter is bound to render, entire compliance with the prestation. There is a solidary liability only when the obligation expressly so states, or when the law or nature of the obligation requires the solidarity.

In this case, the lower court made no finding of fact which in any way shows that the defendants were individually liable by virtue of any agreement, or contract, between the defendants and the plaintiff, whereby they became jointly and individually liable. In the absence of a finding of facts therefore that the defendants made themselves individually liable for the debt incurred, they are each liable for one-half of said obligation. Therefore, they are jointly liable.