Short answer. By consignation. Article 1256 says that when the creditor is absent or unknown, or does not appear at the place of payment, consignation alone, depositing the sum due with the court, releases you from responsibility. You do not first have to make a tender that a missing creditor could never accept.
What the law says
the debtor shall be released from responsibility by the consignation of the thing or sum due
Civil Code, Article 1256 — Tender of Payment and Consignation. Read the full provision →
What the law says
Consignation alone shall produce the same effect
Civil Code, Article 1256 — Tender of Payment and Consignation. Read the full provision →
What the law says
When the creditor is absent or unknown, or does not appear at the place of payment
Civil Code, Article 1256 — Tender of Payment and Consignation. Read the full provision →
What the law says
without just cause, he refuses to give a receipt
Civil Code, Article 1256 — Tender of Payment and Consignation. Read the full provision →
The general rule, and the shortcut for your case
Article 1256 gives two routes to discharge a debt when you cannot simply hand the money over. The ordinary route has two steps: you first make a tender of payment, and only if the creditor to whom tender of payment has been made refuses without just cause to accept it do you then deposit the money, so that the debtor shall be released from responsibility by the consignation of the thing or sum due. But the article then lists situations where the first step is pointless, and there Consignation alone shall produce the same effect. A vanished creditor is one of them.
'Absent or unknown' fits a creditor who has disappeared
Your situation maps directly onto the first listed case: When the creditor is absent or unknown, or does not appear at the place of payment. A creditor you genuinely cannot find, who has moved without a trace or will not surface to be paid, is absent within the meaning of the article. Because the law does not require you to attempt a tender to someone who cannot be reached, you may proceed straight to consignation. The point is fairness: you should not keep owing, or keep watching interest and default consequences build, simply because the other side has made themselves impossible to pay.
What consignation does for you
Consignation means depositing what you owe with the proper court so the law can treat the debt as paid. Its effect here is the release the article promises: the debtor shall be released from responsibility by the consignation of the thing or sum due. Done correctly, it stops the obligation from running against you, so interest, penalties and the risk of default no longer accumulate from the moment the deposit is valid. You are handing the money to the court instead of the creditor, and the creditor is left to withdraw it. This is the mechanism the law provides precisely so an honest debtor is not trapped by a creditor's absence.
It must be a real, proper deposit, not just an offer
Two cautions. First, consignation is a formal act, an actual deposit with the court under the requirements the Code sets out in the articles that follow, not merely setting the money aside or announcing that you are ready to pay. If those requirements are not met, the debt is not discharged and keeps running. Second, the same article covers four other situations where consignation alone suffices: an incapacitated creditor, one who without just cause, he refuses to give a receipt, competing claimants to the same right, and a lost title of the obligation. If your facts shift into one of those, the route is still open, but the ground you rely on should match your actual problem.
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.
- Sps. Ricardo and Lydia Llobrera, et al. vs. Josefina V. Fernandez, G.R. No. 142882, May 2, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Raquel Estipona (Lelandlord E. Sto. Domingo) and Sps. Alberto Co and Lulu Co, G.R. No. 207407, September 29, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Edita A. De Leon, Lara Bianca L. Sarte and Renzo Edgar L. Sarte, G.R. No. 243733, January 12, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Philippine National Bank vs. Lilibeth S. Chan, G.R. No. 206037, March 13, 2017 — read the decision on LawPhil →