Short answer. Yes, but only up to a ceiling. Article 1729 gives those who put their labor upon or furnish materials for a piece of work an action against the owner up to the amount owing from the owner to the contractor at the time the claim is made, and no further.

What the law says

Those who put their labor upon or furnish materials for a piece of work undertaken by the contractor have an action against the owner up to the amount owing from the latter to the contractor at the time the claim is made.

Civil Code, Article 1729 — Direct Action of Laborers and Materialmen. Read the full provision →

A direct action, with a hard limit

Article 1729 provides that Those who put their labor upon or furnish materials for a piece of work undertaken by the contractor have an action against the owner up to the amount owing from the latter to the contractor at the time the claim is made. Two things sit in that sentence. Workers and suppliers who never contracted with the owner may nonetheless sue him, which is a real departure from the ordinary rule that a contract binds only its parties. But the owner's exposure is capped at what he still owes the contractor. An owner who has paid the contract in full owes the claimants nothing at all.

Two ways the cap cannot be manipulated

The article then closes the obvious loopholes. It provides that payments made by the owner to the contractor before they are due shall not prejudice the laborers, employees and furnishers of materials, so an owner cannot defeat the claim by settling the whole contract price early once trouble appears. Nor can the contractor do it for him: a renunciation by the contractor of any amount due him from the owner is equally ineffective against them. Both devices leave the ceiling where it would otherwise have stood, computed as though the premature payment or the waiver had not happened.

Timing decides how much is left

Because the ceiling is measured at the time the claim is made, delay costs claimants money. Every progress billing the owner properly pays in the meantime reduces what is available, and a claim asserted after the final release usually finds nothing behind it. So a supplier or worker who has not been paid should make the demand on the owner promptly and in writing, and an owner who receives such a demand should treat it as a reason to hold back the corresponding amount rather than continue paying the contractor as if nothing had been said.

What each side should be holding

The dispute is arithmetic before it is anything else. Claimants need to prove what they supplied or worked on and that it went into this particular piece of work: delivery receipts addressed to the site, the contractor's purchase orders, signed time records, an itemised statement of account. Owners need the contract, the schedule of billings, the accomplishment reports and the proof and dates of every payment released. Note as well that the article closes by making itself subject to the provisions of special laws, so a statute governing the trade or the project may add to this picture.

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.