Short answer. Yes. Article 1256 lists a creditor who, without just cause, refuses to give a receipt as one of the situations where consignation alone lets you discharge the debt. Rather than pay into a void with no proof, you may deposit the sum with the court, which releases you from responsibility.
What the law says
When, without just cause, he refuses to give a receipt
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
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 →
Refusing a receipt is a listed ground for consignation
Article 1256 does not force you to pay blindly. Its general rule requires a tender the creditor rejects, but it then names five situations where Consignation alone shall produce the same effect without any tender. The third is exactly yours: When, without just cause, he refuses to give a receipt. The law recognises that handing over money to a creditor who will not acknowledge it in writing is a trap. So instead of paying into that trap, you are allowed to bring the sum to court and deposit it there, and the deposit does the work the payment would have done.
Why a receipt is worth insisting on
A receipt is your proof that you paid. Without it, a creditor could later deny receiving your money and demand it a second time, and you would have little to show a court. That is why the law does not treat a demand for a receipt as a mere inconvenience: a debtor is entitled to written acknowledgment of payment, and a creditor who takes the money but withholds any receipt puts your discharge in doubt. Article 1256 answers that danger by giving you an alternative route. Rather than gamble on an unreceipted hand-to-hand payment, you consign, and the court record itself becomes the proof that you paid.
The refusal must be 'without just cause'
The ground is qualified. The article covers a refusal without just cause. A creditor sometimes has a legitimate reason to hesitate, for instance a genuine dispute over the amount, or a real doubt about whether the person paying is the right one. If the refusal to issue a receipt rests on a real, justifiable reason, this ground may not apply, and forcing a consignation could be premature. But a creditor who simply will not put your payment in writing, with no honest reason, refuses without just cause. It is that bare, unjustified refusal that opens the door to depositing your payment in court.
How the deposit discharges you
When the ground fits, consignation brings the release the article promises: the debtor shall be released from responsibility by the consignation of the thing or sum due. Once the deposit is valid, your obligation stops running and the creditor is left to collect from the court. Two practical points: consignation is a formal deposit made under the requirements the Code sets out in the following articles, not merely setting the cash aside; and you should keep your own record of the attempt to pay and the refusal, since you may have to show that the creditor really did decline a receipt without just cause.
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 →