At what moment does an alternative obligation cease to be alternative once I as creditor have made my selection?

The precise moment that ends the alternative nature

Article 1205 of the Civil Code draws the line at communication, not at the moment you make your internal decision. You may have already decided in your mind which item you want, but the obligation stays alternative until the debtor actually receives that choice. The practical implication: if something happens to one of the items between your private decision and your communication, the alternative framework still applies — your selection has no legal effect until it reaches the debtor.

What the debtor owes if one item is lost before you communicate

While the obligation is still alternative, the debtor's exposure depends on how the loss happened. If one item is lost through a fortuitous event — a flood, fire, or other event no one caused — the debtor must deliver whichever item you then choose from those that remain. If only one item survives, that is what you get, and neither side has a damages claim from the loss itself. The debtor is not at fault, and you have not lost your right to something — only the range of choices has narrowed.

When the debtor's fault causes the loss

If the debtor's own fault destroys one of the items before you communicate your choice, you gain options rather than lose them. You may claim any of the surviving items, or you may demand the price of the one that was lost through the debtor's fault — and in either case you are also entitled to damages. The debtor cannot escape liability by pointing to the items that still exist; your right to the monetary equivalent of the destroyed item is preserved.

When the debtor's fault destroys all items

If the debtor's fault destroys every item before you choose, the alternative obligation converts entirely to a money obligation. Article 1205 says your choice then falls upon the price of any one of them, also with indemnity for damages. You pick the price of whichever lost item you prefer. The same rules extend to obligations to do or not to do: if one, some, or all of the required acts become impossible through the debtor's fault, the parallel logic applies.

Why timing your communication matters

Once you communicate your selection, the obligation is no longer alternative — it becomes a simple obligation to deliver or perform that one specific thing. From that point forward, the debtor owes you exactly what you named, and loss of that specific item through the debtor's fault gives you a straightforward damages claim. Holding back your communication means you keep the flexibility of Article 1205's risk rules, but it also means the debtor's exposure is governed by those rules rather than the simpler rules of a single-item obligation. If you are ready to commit, communicate promptly and in a form you can document.

Cases citing this provision

These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.

• Romago, Inc. and Francisco Gonzalez vs. Associated Bank (Now United Overseas Bank Phils.) and Metallor Trading Corporation, G.R. No. 223450, February 22, 2023 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Bank of the Philippine Islands vs Amador Domingo (deceased) substituted by his children, Joann Moya, et al, G.R. No. 169407, March 25, 2015 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Chester Babst, vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 99398, January 26, 2001 — read the decision on LawPhil →
• Elizalde Steel Consolidated, Inc., vs. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 104625, January 26, 2001 — read the decision on LawPhil →

Related provisions

• Civil Code, Article 1205 — Loss When the Creditor Has the Choice