The fault or negligence of the obligor consists in the omission of that diligence which is required by the nature of the obligation and corresponds with the circumstances of the person, of the time and of the place. When negligence shows bad faith, the provisions of Articles 1171 and 2201, paragraph 2, shall apply.
If the law or contract does not state the diligence which is to be observed in the performance, that which is expected of a good father of a family shall be required.
Ang kasalanan o kapabayaan ng obligor ay binubuo sa pagkukulang ng na sipag na kung saan ay kinakailangan sa pamamagitan ng likas na katangian ng obligasyon at tumutugma sa mga pangyayari ng mga tao, ng oras at ng lugar. Kapag kapabayaan ay nagpapakita masamang hangarin, ang mga probisyon ng Artikulo 1171 at 2201, talata 2 , ay dapat mag-apply.
Kung ang batas o kontrata ay hindi ipinapahayag na kung saan ay na-obserbahan sa pagganap, na kung saan ay inaasahan ng isang mahusay na ama ng isang pamilya ay dapat atasan .
Far East Bank and Trust Co. v. Estrella O. Querimit
Facts: Respondents filed a complaint against petitioner bank and certain officials of the latter, alleging that the they refused to allow her to withdraw her time deposit evidenced by four certificates of deposit in the total amount of $60,000. The trial court ordered petitioner-bank and its officials to allow respondent to withdraw her time deposit plus accrued interests. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the decision of the trial court with the modification that petitioner-bank was solely liable because the latter has a personality separate from its officers and stockholders. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the CA.
Held: Petitioner-bank failed to prove that it had already made payment considering that the subject certificates of deposit were still in the possession of the depositors. The principle that payment, in order to discharge a debt, must be made to someone authorized to receive it is applicable to the payment of certificates of deposit. Petitioner should, thus, not have paid respondent’s husband or any third party the amount of the time deposit without requiring the surrender of the certificates of deposit. Laches would also not defeat respondent’s claim as she did not withdraw her deposit because she relied on petitioner bank’s assurance that the interest would accumulate annually even after maturity of the time deposit and she set aside the money therein for the retirement.
Obligations and Contracts 