Short answer. Article 1568 entitles you to recover the price with interest and reimbursement of contract expenses from a seller unaware of the hidden defect. What you get back depends on documentation: keep receipts for notarial fees, documentary stamp tax, and other outlays tied to executing the sale, since reimbursement covers only proven, itemized costs.

What the law says

he shall bear the loss, and shall be obliged to return the price and refund the expenses of the contract, with damages.

Civil Code, Article 1568 — Loss From Hidden Defects. Read the full provision →

What the law says

If he was not aware of them, he shall only return the price and interest thereon, and reimburse the expenses of the contract which the vendee might have paid.

Civil Code, Article 1568 — Loss From Hidden Defects. Read the full provision →

Two different sellers, two different bills

Article 1568 splits liability along a single line: did the seller know about the hidden defect that eventually destroyed what he sold? A seller who knew and stayed silent bears the loss outright — he must return the price, refund the contract expenses, and pay damages besides. A seller who genuinely did not know is treated more gently, but he is not let off the hook entirely.

What the innocent seller must still return

Even without knowledge of the defect, the unaware seller owes the buyer the price paid, interest on that price, and reimbursement of the expenses of the contract — the costs the buyer incurred in putting the sale together, such as notarial fees, documentary stamp costs, or similar outlays tied directly to executing the contract. What he does not owe, in this scenario, is damages.

Why the distinction exists

The rule tracks a basic principle of fairness: a seller who profited from selling something he knew was flawed should not walk away no worse off than an honest seller who was equally in the dark. Requiring the unaware seller to at least undo the transaction — price, interest, and expenses — keeps him from being enriched at the buyer's expense, without punishing him as if he had acted in bad faith.

What counts as proof

A court has little basis for ordering reimbursement of a specific amount without documentation. Notarial fees, documentary stamp tax, transfer or registration costs, and any similar outlay tied to executing the sale should all be backed by a receipt or official record before a buyer asks a court — or the seller directly — to make good on them. A buyer who cannot produce any record of what he actually paid risks recovering nothing on that portion of the claim, even where the underlying right to reimbursement under Article 1568 is not in dispute.

How this fits with the buyer's other options

This article assumes the thing is gone, so getting the item itself back is no longer possible. It exists alongside, not instead of, the buyer's usual remedies for hidden defects; where the thing survives intact, the buyer instead chooses between withdrawing from the sale or asking for a proportionate price reduction, with damages available in either case. Which remedy applies turns entirely on whether the defective item still exists at the time the buyer discovers the defect, so a buyer should pin down that fact first before deciding which article and which set of remedies to invoke.

Related provisions

Note. Statute text quoted on this page is reproduced from the official enactment and is linked to the full provision. The explanation around it is general legal information from Vivas & Nobles Law Office, not legal advice. Whether it applies to your situation depends on facts only a lawyer reviewing them can assess.