Text of the provision
Art. 1411. When the nullity proceeds from the illegality of the cause or object of the contract, and the act constitutes a criminal offense, both parties being in pari delicto, they shall have no action against each other, and both shall be prosecuted. Moreover, the provisions of the Penal Code relative to the disposal of effects or instruments of a crime shall be applicable to the things or the price of the contract. This rule shall be applicable when only one of the parties is guilty; but the innocent one may claim what he has given, and shall not be bound to comply with his promise.
(1305)
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
When the void cause/object constitutes a crime and both parties are in pari delicto, neither may recover and both are prosecuted. If only one is guilty, the innocent party may recover what he gave and need not perform.
Questions about this provision
Related provisions
- Article 1410 — Imprescriptibility of Void Contracts.
- Article 1412 — In Pari Delicto: Non-Criminal.
Cases citing this article
- Klaus Peter Neunzig vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, Twenty, G.R. No. 260983, February 10, 2025 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Engr. Ruben Y. Yu, doing business under the name and style Ryu Construction vs. Heirs of Manuel Sia, represented by Mayor Rosemarie H. Sia, G.R. No. 248495, July 6, 2022 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Desiderio Ranara, Jr. vs. Zacarias De Los Angeles, Jr, G.R. No. 200765, August 8, 2016 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Potenciano Ramirez vs. Ma. Cecilia Ramirez, G.R. No. 165088, March 17, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Spouses David B. Carpo, et al. vs. Eleanor Chua, et al, G.R. No. 150773, September 30, 2005 — 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.