Short answer. Each of you is liable to him for the whole. Where two or more people appoint one agent for a common transaction, the Civil Code makes them solidarily liable to that agent for all the consequences of the agency, so he may present his entire claim to any one of you.
What the law says
If two or more persons have appointed an agent for a common transaction or undertaking, they shall be solidarily liable to the agent for all the consequences of the agency.
Civil Code, Article 1915 — Solidary Liability of Joint Principals. Read the full provision →
What solidary liability means here
Article 1915 provides that If two or more persons have appointed an agent for a common transaction or undertaking, they shall be solidarily liable to the agent for all the consequences of the agency. Solidary means each principal answers for the whole, not for a proportionate share. So where four heirs jointly engage someone to process a sale, or several neighbours engage one representative to deal with a developer, the agent may bring his entire claim to any one of them. The person he approaches cannot insist that he go and collect a quarter from each of the others first.
The condition: one common undertaking
The rule is not triggered merely because several people happen to use the same agent. The article requires a common transaction or undertaking — one shared piece of business. Several co-owners selling one property, several claimants to one estate, several partners in one project: those qualify. If instead each of you engaged the same person separately, for your own unrelated matters, this article does not apply and each answers only for his own. Where the position is ambiguous, the written engagement usually settles it, which is a good reason to have one before the work starts.
All the consequences, not just the fee
The phrase all the consequences of the agency is deliberately wide. It reaches the agent's compensation where compensation was agreed, the sums he advanced from his own pocket to do the job, the interest on those advances, and any indemnity owed to him for damage suffered in carrying out the task. It is not limited to what one particular principal personally asked him to do. That breadth is exactly why the rule bites: a principal who believed he was signing up for a quarter of a modest fee can find himself facing the whole of a much larger bill.
Controlling the exposure
You cannot cut down the agent's rights by a private arrangement among yourselves, but you can control what the exposure grows to. Agree the scope, the fee and a ceiling on expenses in writing with the agent before he begins; require that approval requests go to all of you; and record, also in writing, how the cost is to be divided between you. A principal who ends up paying everything may claim contribution from the others for their shares, and that claim is far easier with a document behind it. Where the amounts are significant, take advice before signing.
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.
- Subic Bay Yacht Club, Inc. vs. Gomeco Metal Corporation, G.R. No. 265921, July 7, 2025 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Constante Amor De Castro and Corazon Amor De Castro vs. Court of Appeals and Francisco Artigo, G.R. No. 115838, July 18, 2002 — read the decision on LawPhil →