
NATURE OF A SURETY’S UNDERTAKING
Category: Obligations and Contracts
NATURE OF A SURETY’S UNDERTAKING
1. CONTRACTUAL AND ACCESSORY BUT DIRECT—The contractual obligation of the surety is merely an accessory or collateral to the obligation contracted by the principal. BUT, his liability to the creditor is direct, primary, and absolute.
2. LIABILITY IS LIMITED BY THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT—The extent of a surety’s liability is determined only by the terms of the contract and cannot be extended by implication.
3. LIABILITY ARISES ONLY IF PRINCIPAL DEBTOR IS HELD LIABLE—If the principal debtor and the surety are held liable, their liability to pay the creditor would be solidary. But, the surety does not incur liability unless and until the principal debtor is held liable.
a. A surety is bound by a judgment against the principal even though the party was not a party to
the proceedings.
b. The creditor may sue, separately or together, the principal debtor and the surety (since they are solidarily bound).
c. Generally, a demand or notice of default is not required to fix the surety’s liability.
d. An accommodation party (one who signs an instrument as maker, drawer, acceptor, or indorser
without consideration and only for the purpose of lending his name) is, in effect, a surety. He is thus
liable to pay the holder of the instrument, subject to reimbursement from the accommodated party.
e. A surety bond is void where there is no principal debtor.
4. SURETY IS NOT ENTITLED TO EXHAUSTION—A surety is not entitled to the exhaustion of the properties of the principal debtor since the surety assumes a solidary liability for the fulfillment of the principal obligation.
5. THE UNDERTAKING IS TO THE CREDITOR, NOT TO THE PRINCIPAL DEBTOR—The debtor cannot claim that the surety breached its obligation to pay for the principal obligation because there is no obligation as between the surety and the debtor. If the surety does not pay, the
principal debtor is still not relieved of his obligation.
6. SURETY NOT ENTITLED TO NOTICE OF PRINCIPAL’S DEFAULT—the surety is bound to take notice of the principal’s default to perform the obligation
7. PRIOR DEMAND BY THE CREDITOR UPON PRINCIPAL NOT REQUIRED—the right of the creditor to proceed against the surety alone exists independently of his right to proceed against the principal where both surety and principal are equally bound
8. SURETY IS NOT EXONERATED BY NEGLECT OF ANOTHER TO SUE PRINCIPAL—mere want of diligence or forbearance doesn’t affect the creditor’s rights vis-à-vis the surety, unless the surety requires him by appropriate notice to sue on the obligation. The raison d’etre for the rule is that
there is nothing to prevent the creditor from proceeding against the principal at any time
Related Philippine Law Resources:
Newer Philippine Law Resources:
Additional Law Reading:
NATURE OF A SURETY’S UNDERTAKING
Category: Obligations and Contracts
NATURE OF A SURETY’S UNDERTAKING
1. CONTRACTUAL AND ACCESSORY BUT DIRECT—The contractual obligation of the surety is merely an accessory or collateral to the obligation contracted by the principal. BUT, his liability to the creditor is direct, primary, and absolute.
2. LIABILITY IS LIMITED BY THE TERMS OF THE CONTRACT—The extent of a surety’s liability is determined only by the terms of the contract and cannot be extended by implication.
3. LIABILITY ARISES ONLY IF PRINCIPAL DEBTOR IS HELD LIABLE—If the principal debtor and the surety are held liable, their liability to pay the creditor would be solidary. But, the surety does not incur liability unless and until the principal debtor is held liable.
a. A surety is bound by a judgment against the principal even though the party was not a party to
the proceedings.
b. The creditor may sue, separately or together, the principal debtor and the surety (since they are solidarily bound).
c. Generally, a demand or notice of default is not required to fix the surety’s liability.
d. An accommodation party (one who signs an instrument as maker, drawer, acceptor, or indorser
without consideration and only for the purpose of lending his name) is, in effect, a surety. He is thus
liable to pay the holder of the instrument, subject to reimbursement from the accommodated party.
e. A surety bond is void where there is no principal debtor.
4. SURETY IS NOT ENTITLED TO EXHAUSTION—A surety is not entitled to the exhaustion of the properties of the principal debtor since the surety assumes a solidary liability for the fulfillment of the principal obligation.
5. THE UNDERTAKING IS TO THE CREDITOR, NOT TO THE PRINCIPAL DEBTOR—The debtor cannot claim that the surety breached its obligation to pay for the principal obligation because there is no obligation as between the surety and the debtor. If the surety does not pay, the
principal debtor is still not relieved of his obligation.
6. SURETY NOT ENTITLED TO NOTICE OF PRINCIPAL’S DEFAULT—the surety is bound to take notice of the principal’s default to perform the obligation
7. PRIOR DEMAND BY THE CREDITOR UPON PRINCIPAL NOT REQUIRED—the right of the creditor to proceed against the surety alone exists independently of his right to proceed against the principal where both surety and principal are equally bound
8. SURETY IS NOT EXONERATED BY NEGLECT OF ANOTHER TO SUE PRINCIPAL—mere want of diligence or forbearance doesn’t affect the creditor’s rights vis-à-vis the surety, unless the surety requires him by appropriate notice to sue on the obligation. The raison d’etre for the rule is that
there is nothing to prevent the creditor from proceeding against the principal at any time
Related Philippine Law Resources:
Newer Philippine Law Resources:
Additional Law Reading:
BATASnatin The Firm
Latest @ Forums
-
-
- Shema Corporation legal ba?
- In General Discussion
- 5 days, 20 hours ago
-
-
-
- foreclosed property, i need guides please help me
- In I Need A Lawyer!
- 2 weeks, 2 days ago
-
-
-
- i cant access even the demo
- In Law MCQuizzer
- 2 weeks, 2 days ago
-
Popular
- 1
- 2
- 3
SUGGESTED ANSWERS …
ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS IN POLITICAL LAW ARRANGED BY TOPIC (1990 – 2006) Edited and Arranged by:Silliman University College of Law Batch 2005Updated by:DondeeD’ BAR-Retake 2007 From the ANSWERS TO BAR EXAMINATION QUESTIONS by the UP LAW COMPLEX & PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATION OF LAW SCHO...
Read moreOral Defamation l S…
Kinds and Definition of Slander or Oral Defamation Definition: Speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade, business or means of livelihood Two kinds of oral or verbal defamation: (1) Grave Slander (2) Simple Slander A. Factor...
Read moreArticle I – THE NAT…
Article I – THE NATIONAL TERRITORYThe national territory of the Philippines comprises:1) the Philippine archipelago;2) all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdictionPHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO – that body of water studded with islands which is delineated in the Treaty of...
Read moreRandom
- 1
- 2
- 3
Negotiable Instrume…
Sec. 10. Terms, when sufficient. - The instrument need not follow the language of this Act, but any terms are sufficient which clearly indicate an intention to conform to the requirements hereof. Illustrative case: JIMENEZ V. BUCOY 103 PHIL 40 F...
Read moreHOW ARE CRIMINAL AC…
HOW ARE CRIMINAL ACTIONS INSTITUTED?1. For offenses where a preliminary investigation is required, by filing a complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting the requisite preliminary investigation 2. For the other offenses, by ...
Read moreCLASSIFICATION OF C…
CLASSIFICATION OF CRIMES AS TO GRAVITY I. The basis is the penalty prescribed by the RPC and not the actual penalty imposed by the court. If both imprisonment and fine are prescribed as penalties, it is the penalty of imprisonment which is used a...
Read moreFeatured
- 1
- 2
- 3
Right to Strike
SSSEA v. CA – right to strike – At present, in the absence of any legislation in government employees the right to strike, recognizing their right to do so, or regulating the exercise of such right, they are prohibited form striking by express prohi...
Read morePeople vs. Tolentin…
G.R. No. 176385, February 26, 2008 FACTS: On 13 February 1998, three separate informations of Murder and two counts of Frustrated Murder were filed before the RTC against appellants, together with accused Jimmy Trinidad and Arnel Trinidad. The murd...
Read morePerfection Of A Con…
In Oesmer, Jr., et al. v. Paraiso Dev. Corp., G.R. No. 157493, February 5, 2007, a contract to sell was entered into by the owners of a real property. They affixed their signatures but contested its validity later contending that their co-owner had n...
Read more

