Short answer. Yes. Article 1786 makes a partner liable for the fruits of what he promised to contribute from the time it should have been delivered, without need of any demand. Because the due date already passed, you owe the partnership the fruits from that date, even though nobody formally demanded the car.
What the law says
He shall also be liable for the fruits thereof from the time they should have been delivered, without the need of any demand.
Civil Code, Article 1786 — Partner as Debtor for His Contribution. Read the full provision →
Liability begins on the due date, not on demand
Article 1786 states plainly that a partner shall also be liable for the fruits thereof from the time they should have been delivered, without the need of any demand. This is a meaningful departure from the ordinary rule for many obligations, where a debtor is often only in default once the creditor makes a demand. Here, the partnership does not need to send you any notice or demand for the fruits of the car to start accruing against you; the moment the agreed delivery date passed without the car being contributed, your liability for its fruits began automatically.
Why the law treats a partner's contribution this strictly
Article 1786 first establishes that every partner is a debtor of the partnership for whatever he may have promised to contribute thereto, treating the promised contribution as a real debt owed to the partnership rather than a loose commitment. Because the partnership's business and its other partners rely on contributions arriving as promised, the law does not wait for a formal demand before making the delayed partner accountable for what the property would have earned in the meantime. This protects the partnership from bearing the cost of one partner's delay in fulfilling a contribution they already committed to.
What 'fruits' means for a car used in the delay period
Fruits in this context covers whatever benefit or income the property would have generated for the partnership had it been delivered on time. For a car, that could include any rental income, business use value, or similar benefit the partnership was deprived of because the car was not contributed when it should have been. If you personally used or earned income from the car during the delay, that use is directly relevant to calculating what you owe the partnership as fruits accrued during the period you held onto it past the due date.
What this means going forward
Since your liability for the fruits already started running from the missed due date regardless of any demand, delivering the car now does not erase what has already accrued in the meantime. It is worth calculating, together with the other partners or through the partnership's books, exactly how much benefit the car would have generated for the partnership from the due date to the date you actually deliver it, since that amount is what Article 1786 makes you answerable for on top of the contribution itself.
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.
- Gold Line Tours, Inc. vs. Heirs of Maria Concepcion Lacsa, G.R. No. 159108, June 18, 2012 — read the decision on LawPhil →