Short answer. It depends on whether the thing can be divided and on how you hold it. If it can be split and you are not solidary, each of you can demand only his own share. If it cannot be divided, or you are solidary, the rules on solidary creditors apply — and any agreement naming one person to receive it controls.
What the law says
When there are two or more depositors, if they are not solidary, and the thing admits of division, each one cannot demand more than his share.
Civil Code, Article 1985 — Several Depositors. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The debtor may pay any one of the solidary creditors; but if any demand, judicial or extrajudicial, has been made by one of them, payment should be made to him.
Civil Code, Article 1214 — Payment to a Solidary Creditor. Read the full provision →
The article in plain terms
Article 1985 provides that When there are two or more depositors, if they are not solidary, and the thing admits of division, each one cannot demand more than his share. Two ideas do the work. A thing admits of division when it can be split without being ruined — a sum of money, a quantity of grain. It does not when splitting destroys it, as with a vehicle, a ring or a land title. Solidary means each of you may deal with the whole rather than only your own portion. That is not presumed; it comes from your agreement or from the law.
Where the thing can be divided
This is the simpler case. If three of you left three hundred thousand pesos in equal shares, one of you may ask for a hundred thousand and no more. A keeper who hands the whole amount to whoever asks first is exposed to the other two, and a keeper who is unsure is entitled to be careful. The practical lesson runs the other way as well: if you want any one of you to be able to withdraw everything, you must say so at the outset. Depositing together — as relatives, as partners, as a group — does not create that power by itself.
Where it cannot be divided, or you are solidary
Here the article sends you to the rules on solidary creditors. Article 1212 allows each solidary creditor to do whatever may be useful to the others, but not anything prejudicial to them. Article 1214 then supplies the practical rule: The debtor may pay any one of the solidary creditors; but if any demand, judicial or extrajudicial, has been made by one of them, payment should be made to him. So the keeper may in principle release the thing to any one of you — but once one of you has made a formal demand, that demand fixes where it must go.
A naming clause settles almost everything
The last sentence of the article is the one to use in advance: if there is a stipulation that the thing should be returned to one of the depositors, the keeper must return it only to the person designated. Agreeing at the start who may collect removes most disputes in this area, and it binds the keeper. Put it in the receipt or the written arrangement. Where a fight has already started, a keeper caught between claimants should not simply pick one; he can take advice on placing the matter before a court so the claimants argue with each other rather than with him.
Related provisions
- Civil Code, Article 1985 — Several Depositors
- Civil Code, Article 1212 — Useful and Prejudicial Acts of a Solidary Creditor
- Civil Code, Article 1214 — Payment to a Solidary Creditor