Text of the provision
Art. 1207. The concurrence of two or more creditors or of two or more debtors in one and the same obligation does not imply that each one of the former has a right to demand, or that each one of the latter is bound to render, entire compliance with the prestation. There is a solidary liability only when the obligation expressly so states, or when the law or the nature of the obligation requires solidarity.
(1137a)
Civil Code of the Philippines, Republic Act No. 386, approved June 18, 1949, effective August 30, 1950. Reproduced in full; verified verbatim against the LawPhil and ChanRobles official-text renderings.
What this article means
Where there are several creditors or debtors, each is generally bound only to their share — solidarity is not presumed. There is solidary liability only when the obligation expressly states it, or the law or the nature of the obligation requires it.
Related provisions
- Article 1206 — Facultative Obligations.
- Article 1208 — Presumption of Joint Obligation.
Cases citing this article
- Subic Bay Yacht Club, Inc. vs. Gomeco Metal Corporation, G.R. No. 265921, July 7, 2025 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- AFP Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFPRSBS) vs. Eduardo Sanvictores, G.R. No. 207586, August 17, 2016 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Banco De Oro Universal Inc vs. Liza A. Seastres and Annabelle N. Benaje, G.R. No. 257151, February 13, 2023 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- International Exchange Bank vs. Rudy S. Labos And Associates, Inc., Sps. Rodolfo S. Labos And Consuelo R. Labos, And Rockwell Land Corporation, G.R. No. 206327, July 6, 2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- The Redsystems Company, Inc. vs. Eduardo V. Macalino, Danilo Tolentino, Axel Panglinan, Leonardo Santos, Jr., Crisanto Tabago, Noel Tagaro, Gerald Balmores, and R-Jay Vidad, G.R. No. 252783, September 21, 2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Compiled automatically from Supreme Court decisions published on LawPhil that expressly cite this article, most frequently cited first. A listing means the decision cites the provision — it is not a statement that the case is the leading authority, and it does not show whether a ruling has since been modified or abandoned. Always read the decision itself.