Short answer. You have six years to file suit on a verbal agreement. Article 1145 of the Civil Code provides that actions upon an oral contract must be commenced within six years. The clock generally starts from the date the other party breached the agreement — not from when the agreement was made.
What the law says
The following actions must be commenced within six years: (1) Upon an oral contract;
Civil Code, Article 1145 — Six-Year Actions. Read the full provision →
Six years from breach, not from the agreement
Article 1145 of the Civil Code sets a six-year prescriptive period for actions based on an oral contract. The period does not begin when the agreement was reached — it begins when the cause of action arises, which is ordinarily when the other party failed to perform what they promised. If the agreement was made three years ago but the breach happened only last month, you still have six years from the breach to go to court. The date of the original conversation is generally irrelevant; what matters is when the duty to perform arose and was not honored.
Why the law gives less time than for written contracts
Written contracts are given a longer prescriptive period because they produce a clear, verifiable record of what was agreed. Verbal agreements depend on the memories of the parties and any witnesses present. The six-year period for oral contracts reflects the balance the law draws between allowing people to enforce genuine verbal agreements and recognizing that the passage of time erodes evidence. After six years, recollections fade, witnesses become unavailable, and a dispute over what was said years ago becomes very hard to resolve fairly. Six years is enough time to act; waiting longer risks losing the right entirely.
What you need to prove the oral contract
Going to court on a verbal agreement means proving the contract existed and was breached — without a signed document. Evidence that helps: text messages or chat logs that confirm the terms, emails referencing the agreement, bank transfers or receipts showing payment under the deal, and testimony from witnesses who were present or were told about the arrangement by both sides. The stronger and more contemporaneous your evidence, the better your position. If you have nothing but your own word against the other party's denial, the case becomes much harder — though not automatically lost, since courts do evaluate credibility.
Act before the six years runs out
Prescription is a strict bar. Once the six-year period expires, the right to sue is extinguished, and the other party can raise prescription as a complete defense even if the breach is undisputed. Do not wait to see if the situation resolves itself. If a significant amount of money or property is at stake, consult a lawyer sooner rather than later — not only to preserve your prescriptive period, but also to assess whether the facts you have are sufficient to pursue a claim and what outcome is realistically achievable.
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.
- Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. San Miguel Corporation/San Miguel Corporation vs. Commissioner of Internal, G.R. No. 180740 / G.R. No. 180910, November 11, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Maria L. Anido, et al. vs. Filomeno Negado, et al, G.R. No. 143990, October 17, 2001 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Francisco L. Rosario, Jr. vs. Lellani De Guzman, Arleen De Guzman, et al, G.R. No. 191247, July 10, 2013 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Pablo R. Antonio, Jr. vs. Engr. Emilio M. Morales etc, G.R. No. 165552, January 23, 2007 — read the decision on LawPhil →