STUDY GUIDE: Arts.

1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)

Page 1 of 15

CHAPTER 4, SECTION 3
Condonation or Remission of the Debt
(Arts. 1270-1274)

1. What is condonation or remission?

 Remission is an act of liberality by virtue of

which the obligee, without receiving any price or
equivalent, renounces the enforcement of the obligation,
as a result of which it is extinguished in its entirety or in
that part or aspect of the same to which the remission
refers.

 Condonation or remission is the gratuitous

abandonment by the creditor of his right. It is, in effect, a
donation. (Art. 1270)

 Example: Edna owes Remie P120,000.00. On maturity

date, Remie tells Edna that she does not need to pay the
debt, since Remie is condoning or remitting the same.
Edna agrees and expresses her appreciation to Remie.
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 2 of 15

Here, the debt of Edna is already extinguished by

condonation or remission.

2. Requisites of condonation or remission. – For

condonation or remission to be valid, the following
requisites must concur:

(a) The obligation remitted must have been

demandable at the time of the remission; otherwise, the
remission is useless.

(b) The cause or consideration for the remission must

be the liberality of the creditor.

 Gratuitous character of remission. – The most

essential and inherent characteristic of condonation or
remission is that it is gratuitous. (Art. 1270, par. 1)
Consequently, before it can be said that an obligation has
been condoned by the creditor, it is essential that it must
be an act of pure liberality of the creditor for the benefit of
the debtor; in other words, the creditor should not have
received any price or equivalent from the debtor as a
result of his act in renouncing the enforcement of the
obligation.

(c) The remission must be accepted by the debtor.

STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 3 of 15

 Necessity of acceptance by the debtor. –

Condonation or remission is an act of liberality. It is a
donation of an existing credit – considered a property right
– in favor of the debtor. As the liberality of a person
cannot just be imposed upon another, it is required that
the debtor gives his consent thereto by making an
acceptance. (Art. 1270, par. 1)

 Condonation is a bilateral act. – Condonation or

remission is not a unilateral act. It is a bilateral act. If
there is no acceptance, there is no remission.

(d) If the remission is expressly made, the formalities

required by the law on donation must be complied with.
(Art. 1270, par. 2)

 When real (or immovable) property is involved

in condonation. – If the debtor’s obligation to give, which
is expressly condoned by the creditor, involves immovable
property, the remission and the acceptance must be in a
public instrument. The public instrument must specify the
property remitted and the value of the charges that the
debtor (donee) must satisfy. (Art. 749, NCC)

 When personal (or movable) property is

involved in condonation. –
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 4 of 15

 If the value of the personal property exceeds P5,000.00,

the remission and the acceptance must be in writing
(public or private). (Art. 748, par. 3)

 If the value of the property is P5,000.00 or less, the

remission and the acceptance may be in any form (i.e.,
oral or in writing). The remission, however, if made
orally, requires the simultaneous delivery of the thing
or the document representing the right remitted.
(Art. 748, pars. 1 & 2)

(e) What has been condoned or remitted must not be

inofficious.

 Effect of inofficious remission. – Under the law,

no person may give, by way of donation, more than he
may give by will. Any donation that exceeds this limitation
is inofficious, and shall be reduced by the court
accordingly.

 As a rule, a person may dispose of by will only

the “free portion” of his estate. The free portion is what
remains of the estate after deducting therefrom the
legitime of the compulsory heirs.

 Legitime is that part of the testator’s

property which he cannot dispose of because the law has
reserved it for certain heirs (like the children with respect
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 5 of 15

to their parents) who are, therefore, called compulsory

heirs. (Arts. 886 & 887, NCC)

 Example: Maning, a widower, died survived by his only

heir – his daughter Millena. In his last will and testament,
Maning renounced a debt owing to him from Delfin in the
amount of P1 million. The said debt constituted his only
estate. Since Maning could only dispose of one-half of his
estate (free portion), as the other half (legitime) belongs to
his legitimate child Millena, the renunciation was
inofficious and should be reduced by the court accordingly
to the extent of one-half upon petition of Millena.

3. Kinds of condonation or remission. –

(a) As to its amount or extent:

 Total or complete – When the total obligation

(both principal and accessory obligation) is extinguished.

 Example: Jessa owes Arnel P100,000.00. On due date

of the obligation, Jessa offers to pay her debt to Arnel, but
he tells her that he is renouncing his right to collect the
debt as he won in the lottery. This is a complete remission
and requires the acceptance of Jessa, because an obligor
cannot be compelled to accept the generosity of another
and owe the creditor a favor.
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 6 of 15

 Partial – When only a part of the obligation, or

only the accessory obligation is remitted.

 Example: In the same example above, assume that

Jessa offers to pay the whole amount of P100,000.00 to
Arnel but the latter accepts only P50,000.00 and
renounces the balance. In such case, there is only partial
remission, which also requires Jessa’s acceptance.

(b) As to its form:

 Express – One made orally or in writing. To be

valid, it must comply with the formalities of a contract of
donation.

 Implied – There is implied condonation if,

through the act or conduct of the creditor, the intent on
his part to condone the debt can be deduced. For
instance, the delivery by the creditor to the debtor of the
document evidencing a credit is one such act. (Article
1271, NCC) Thus, if the payee of a promissory note
destroys it or delivers it to the maker, there is an implied
renunciation of the credit.

(c) As to its date of effectivity:

STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 7 of 15

 Inter vivos – One that takes effect during the

lifetime of the donor (creditor).

 Mortis Cause – One that takes effect upon the

death of the donor (creditor) and partakes of the nature of
a testamentary disposition. Hence, it must comply with
the formalities of a will.

4. Some legal presumptions related to condonation or

remission:

(a) Presumption of voluntary delivery - When the

private document in which the debt appears is found in
the possession of the debtor, it shall be presumed that the
creditor voluntarily delivered the document to the debtor.
(Art. 1272)

(b) Presumption of remission of the principal

obligation – When the private document in which the debt
appears is voluntarily delivered by the creditor to the
debtor, it shall be presumed that the creditor is condoning
or remitting the debt in favor of the debtor. (Art. 1271,
par. 1)

 Rationale for this presumption. – The voluntary

return of the evidence of credit by the creditor to the
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 8 of 15

debtor is an implied renunciation or remission of the

debtor’s debt. The reason for this is that the creditor
would not have returned the document evidencing the
credit to the debtor had the creditor still wanted to collect
the debtor’s debt.

 Illustrative Example: Dana owes Carlito P500,000.00

which is evidenced by a promissory note signed by Dana in
Carlito’s favor due for payment on 30 May 2022. On 1
January 2022, the promissory note is found in the
possession of Dana. If the promissory note is voluntarily
delivered to Dana, the presumption is that the debt must
have been paid by Dana. If it is known that Dana had not
yet paid Carlito, it must be presumed that the obligation
has been remitted by Carlito (Art. 1271, par 1).

If it is not known or proven how Dana came into

possession of the promissory note, the presumption is that
it was voluntarily delivered by Carlito, unless Carlito proves
the contrary (Art. 1272). Hence, Carlito can introduce
evidence to prove that he did not in fact voluntarily deliver
the promissory note to Dana, but that the note was taken
from him without his consent, such as when it was
obtained from him by force, or that it was stolen from him,
or that Dana just borrowed it from him for purposes of
photocopying the document.
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 9 of 15

 To recapitulate, where the promissory note

evidencing the credit is already in the possession of the
debtor, there arises a disputable presumption to the effect
that the creditor must have delivered it voluntarily to him
(Art. 1272). Consequently, in the absence of proof to the
contrary, an implied or tacit renunciation of the debt may
likewise be presumed (Art. 1271, par 1).

 When remission is claimed to be inofficious. – In

the example above, assume that Carlito, the payee of the
promissory note made by Dana in the amount of
P500,000.00, voluntarily delivers the note back to Dana on
1 January 2022. By this act, there arises the prima facie
presumption that Carlito is renouncing his action to collect
from Dana the amount of the promissory note. On 15
January 2022, Carlito dies of a heart attack. The
compulsory heirs of Carlito now files an action to impugn
or nullify the renunciation or condonation by establishing
that it is inofficious (in conformity with the remedy which
is available to them under Article 771 of the Civil Code) on
the ground that by such act of remission they now receive
less than what the law has reserved for them as their
legitime. To rebut the presumption and to frustrate the
action filed by the heirs of Carlito (in accordance with the
second paragraph of Article 1271), Dana may allege in her
answer to the complaint that the delivery of the
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 10 of 15

promissory note to her on 1 January 2022 by Carlito was

made because she had already paid the indebtedness.

(c) Presumption of remission of the accessory

obligation – When the thing pledged, after its delivery to
the creditor, is found in the possession of the debtor, or of
a third person who owns the thing, it shall be presumed
that the creditor has remitted the debtor’s accessory
obligation under the accessory contract of pledge.
(Art. 1274)

 Pledge. - By the contract of pledge, a debtor (or

any third person), to secure the performance of a principal
obligation, surrenders possession of a personal property
he absolutely owns to the creditor (or to a third person as
the debtor and the creditor may designate) for him to
alienate, should the obligation be not paid when it
becomes due, for the payment of the obligation.
(Arts. 2085, 2087, and 2093, NCC.)

 Illustrative Example: Dante owes Christel P500,000.00

due for payment on 30 May 2022. To secure the loan,
Dante delivers to Christel his Tag Heuer Carrerra
Chronograph watch valued at P700,000.00. On 15 March
2022, the watch is found in the possession of Dante.
There arises here a presumption that Christel had remitted
the accessory contract of pledge, and has agreed to the
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 11 of 15

loan without the pledge. Dante’s obligation under the

principal contract of loan is not, however, affected. If
Christel later on demands for payment and files suit to
recover the indebtedness, she may disprove the
presumption of remission by proving that she gave the
watch temporarily to Dante to be repaired, or that Dante
was able to take possession of the watch without her
consent or authority.

5. Effects of the foregoing presumptions:

(a) These are merely disputable presumptions.

If there is no evidence to the contrary, the presumption
stands. Conversely, these presumptions lose their legal
efficacy if the creditor is able to present proof or evidence
to rebut the presumptions.

(b) In Art. 1274, only the accessory obligation

of pledge, and not the principal obligation, is remitted.
Hence, the debtor is still indebted to the creditor but there
is no more security. This provision adheres to the rule that
“accessory follows the principal”. This is further reiterated
in Art. 1273 which states that the remission of the
accessory obligation does not remit the principal
obligation, but the remission of the principal obligation
also remits the accessory obligation.
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 12 of 15

APPLICATION/PROBLEMS:

1. In a promissory note signed on 15 May 2011,

Larissa bound herself to pay Brian her P600,000.00
indebtedness not later than 15 May 2012. On due date,
Brian decided that he was already condoning Larissa’s
obligation; hence, he did not make any demand under this
obligation. On 1 June 2022, Brian died of lung cancer.
During the wake, Brian’s daughter found the promissory
note signed by Larissa in her father’s favor. On 2 June
2022, she then immediately sought for Larissa and
demanded from her payment under this obligation.
Larissa, however, refused to pay alleging that the
obligation had already been extinguished. Do you agree
with Larissa’s contention? Assuming that the obligation
may already have been extinguished, what was the mode
of its extinguishment? Explain.
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 13 of 15

2. On 15 May 2021, Ryan signed a promissory note

with the following tenor: “I promise to pay the amount of
P100,000.00 to Judy on 15 May 2022.” Judy took hold of
the promissory note so that she has evidence of the
unpaid debt of Ryan. On 25 October 2021, a burglar
entered the house of Judy, and stole some valuables. On
that occasion, Judy lost the promissory note signed by
Ryan. On 15 May 2022, Judy went to Ryan to collect his
P100,000.00 debt. To Judy’s surprise, Ryan was already in
possession of the promissory note, and refused to pay his
obligation. Ryan told Judy that since he was already in
possession of the promissory note, it is presumed that he
had already paid his debt of P100,000.00, and there was
nothing Judy could do about it. Is Ryan’s position
tenable? (Arts. 1271 & 1272)

3. On 15 May 2021, Amanda and Imari signed a

promissory note with the following tenor: “I promise to
pay Edison the amount of P300,000.00 on or before 15
May 2022.” On 10 December 2021, Edison visited Amanda
in her home. After she led him to the living room, Edison
just smiled and handed Amanda the promissory note, then
said goodbye. Under the facts, will Amanda and Imari be
completely released from their obligation under this
note? (Art. 1271)
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 14 of 15

4. Melissa owes Anselmo P500,000.00 due for

payment on 31 May 2022. As guarantor of the obligation,
Beverly obliged herself in writing to Anselmo that she will
pay him the obligation of Melissa if the latter fails to pay
the indebtedness on maturity date. On 25 December
2021, Anselmo executed a written document stating that,
“I hereby release Beverly from her obligation under the
Contract of Guaranty because I have fallen madly in love
with Melissa.” Will Melissa still be obliged to pay
Anselmo the P500,000.00 on maturity date of the
obligation?
obligation? (Arts. 1273)

5. On 15 May 2021, Nick borrowed P100,000.00 from

Paul payable on 15 May 2022. As security for the loan,
Nick pledged his antique coffee table worth P150,000.00
to Paul, and immediately delivered the table to Paul. On
15 October 2021, Paul received, as a birthday gift, a
European coffee table with chairs from his son in Europe.
As a consequence, Paul requested his nephew to deliver
back to Nick the pledged antique coffee table to give space
to the new one. On 15 May 2022, Paul went to the house
of Nick, and demanded payment of the P100,000.00 debt
as agreed upon. Nick, however, refused to pay the
P100,000.00 on the ground that when Paul returned the
antique coffee table which Nick had delivered to him as a
pledge, Paul had in effect condoned Nick’s indebtedness.
Is Nick’s argument correct?
correct? (Art. 1274)
STUDY GUIDE: Arts. 1270-1274 (Condonation or Remission of the Debt)
Page 15 of 15

 END OF LECTURE 

HAPPY READING & LEARNING! 

Prepared by:

Atty. Harriet B. Reyes-Linsangan

4 June 2022 (Saturday)

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Self-discipline is an act of cultivation.

It requires you to connect today’s actions to tomorrow’s results.
There’s a season for sowing, a season for reaping.
Self-discipline helps you know which is which.

Gary Ryan Blair