Short answer. It depends on fault. Where a thing is owed on a fixed future date, the law applies the loss-and-deterioration rules of Article 1189. If the thing deteriorates or is lost without the debtor's fault, you as creditor bear that; if it happens through the debtor's fault, he answers for it in damages or you may rescind.

What the law says

In case of loss, deterioration or improvement of the thing before the arrival of the day certain, the rules in article 1189 shall be observed.

Civil Code, Article 1194 — Loss Before the Period Arrives. Read the full provision →

What the law says

When the thing deteriorates without the fault of the debtor, the impairment is to be borne by the creditor

Civil Code, Article 1189 — Loss, Deterioration, Improvement Pending a Suspensive Condition. Read the full provision →

A fixed future date borrows the condition rules

When an obligation is to be performed on a day certain — a future date that is sure to come — Article 1194 does not invent a new set of rules for damage that happens in the meantime. It borrows them: in case of loss, deterioration or improvement of the thing before the arrival of the day certain, the rules in article 1189 shall be observed. So the answer to who bears a mishap during the waiting period is found by turning to the article that governs a thing held while a suspensive condition is pending, and applying it to your fixed-date sale.

Deterioration without fault falls on the creditor

Article 1189 sorts the outcomes by fault. If the thing merely deteriorates and the debtor is not to blame, the impairment is to be borne by the creditor — that is you, the buyer awaiting delivery. You would receive the thing in its reduced state without a price adjustment, because no one did anything wrong. This reflects a basic idea in the law of obligations: an accidental loss in value that no party caused is treated as one of the ordinary risks the person set to receive the thing must shoulder.

When the debtor is at fault

The result flips if the damage traces to the debtor's fault. Where the thing deteriorates through the fault of the debtor, you may choose between rescinding the obligation and demanding its fulfillment, with indemnity for damages in either case. If the thing is entirely lost through his fault, he is obliged to pay damages; if it is lost without his fault, the obligation is simply extinguished. So the debtor cannot let carelessness spoil the thing and still hand it over as if nothing happened — fault shifts the loss squarely onto him.

Improvements and the limits of the rule

The same article also handles the happier case: if the thing improves by its nature or by the passage of time, the improvement benefits you as creditor; if the debtor improved it at his own expense, his rights are limited to those of a usufructuary. Bear in mind these rules govern the risk of loss between the parties before delivery; they do not override a special stipulation you made allocating risk differently, and they assume a determinate thing owed on a genuine day certain rather than an obligation of a different character.

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.

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.