Text of the provision
Art. 1385. Rescission creates the obligation to return the things which were the object of the contract, together with their fruits, and the price with its interest; consequently, it can be carried out only when he who demands rescission can return whatever he may be obliged to restore. Neither shall rescission take place when the things which are the object of the contract are legally in the possession of third persons who did not act in bad faith. In this case, indemnity for damages may be demanded from the person causing the loss.
(1295)
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
Rescission obliges mutual return of the things, their fruits, and the price with interest, so it works only if the party seeking it can restore what he received. It cannot prejudice third persons in good faith; against them, only damages lie. A key limit on rescission.
Related provisions
- Article 1384 — Rescission Limited to Damage.
- Article 1386 — Court-Approved Contracts.
Cases citing this article
- Camp John Hay Development Corporation vs. Charter Chemical and Coating Corporation, G.R. No. 198849, August 7, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Philippine Economic Zone Authority, vs. Pilhino Sales Corporation, G.R. No. 185765, September 28, 2016 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Oliverio Laperal, et al. vs. Solid Homes, Inc, G.R. No. 130913, June 21, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- The Wellex Group, Inc. vs. U-Land Airlines, Co., Ltd, G.R. No. 167519, January 14, 2015 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Gotesco Properties, Inc., et al. vs. Sps. Eugenio and Angelina Fajardo, G.R. No. 201167, February 27, 2013 — 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.