TUASON, TUASON, INC. v. ANTONIO MACHUCA (1924) 5.

The Universal Trading Company having been declared insol-

Note: Tuason Co. is not the same as Tuason Inc. vent, Manila Compañia brought an action against Tuason, Tu-
ason & Co. to recover the value of the note for P9,663
Doctrine: (special agreement) While the action brought by the surety against the 6. The fi􏰄nal judgment therein, which was a􏰄ffirmed by SC on ap-
principal debtor does not come under the provisions of article 1843, because the peal, for the total sum of P12,197.27, which includes the value +
surety has applied for the reimbursement of a certain amount, which remedy is
interest
not authorized by said article, yet it having been proven by the evidence that the
7. Subsequently, all the rights of Tuason, Tuason & Co. were
principal debtor has executed a document in favor of the surety, wherein he bound
himself to pay any such amount as he may have paid or become bound to pay by transferred to the plaintiff Tuason, Tuason, Inc.
virtue of the principal obligation, and it having been shown that the surety has This case —
become bound to pay the obligation because a fi􏰄nal judgment had been ren- 8. Tuason, Tuason, Inc., brought this action to recover of Antonio
dered against him to that effect, the remedy applied for by the surety may be Machuca the sum of P12,197.27 which it was sentenced to pay
granted in this particular case, although he may not yet have paid said judgment. in the case 􏰄led against it by Manila Compañia, + attorney's
fees, costs + 10% interest pa = total of P15,353.19
FACTS: a. For its cause of action, the Tuason Inc. alleges that it had
1. A bond of P9,663 given and executed by "Manila Compañia de paid Manila Compañia P12,197.27, the amount of the judg-
Seguros” ment against it.
2. This allowed the Universal Trading Company to withdraw from 9. Lower court ordered Antonio Machuca to pay Tucson Inc.
the customhouse sundry goods imported by it and consigned
through BPI. ISSUES:
3. BPI then claimed the value of the goods, and the Insular Collec- 1. WoN Tuason already paid Manila Compañia de Seguros — NO.
tor of Customs obligated Manila Compañia to pay the bond 2. WoN Tuason is entitled to reimbursement from Machuca — YES.
amount
— RULING:
4. Before paying the bond, Manila Compañia obtained in is favor a
solidary note of P9,663 executed by the Universal Trading Com- 1st Issue: NOT PAID
pany and Tuason, Tuason & Co. 1. Tuason In. has not in fact paid the amount of the judgment to
a. Before signing said note, Tuason, Tuason & Co., in turn, "Manila Compañia de Seguros. Hence, the alleged cause of ac-
caused the Universal Trading Company and its president tion does not exist.
Antonio Machuca, personally, to sign a document, wherein a. It appears from the evidence that what was alleged to be a
they bound themselves solidarily to pay, reimburse, and re- payment made to Manila Compañia for the satisfaction of
fund to Tuason, Tuason & Co all such sums or amounts of the judgment is the execution by Albina Tuason of a docu-
money as it may pay or become bound to pay, upon its ob- ment in favor of Manila Compañia
ligation with Manila Compañia, whether or not it shall have b. In this document Albina Tuason declares that she assumes
actually paid such sum or sums or any part thereof. and makes hers the obligation to pay the amount of said
In a previous case — judgment to Manila Compañia within 1 year and mortgages
a property described in the document as security for this
obligation.
 c. This obligation of Albina Tuason was accepted by the Ma- c. It is indisputable that the plaintiff became bound and liable
nila Compañia by a 􏰄final judgment to pay Manila Compañia
d. The action brought by the plaintiff is that which a surety, 4. The defendant also contends that the document executed by Al-
who pays the debt of the debtor, is entitled to bring to re- bina Tuason in favor of Manila Compañia assuming and making
cover the amount thus paid (art. 1823, Civil Code). hers the obligation of Tuason, Tuason & Co., was a novation of
the contract by substitution of the debtor, and relieved Tuason,
2nd Issue: ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT Tuason & Co. from all obligation in favor of "Manila Compañia
2. The contention that Tuason is entitled to bring this action under de Seguros.
article 1843, which provides that the surety may, even before a. " As to this, it is enough to say that if this was what Albina
making payment, bring action against the principal debtor is un- Tuason contemplated in signing the document, evidently it
tenable. was not what "Manila Compañia de Seguros" accepted. As
a. The present action, according to the terms of the complaint, above stated, "Manila Compañia de Seguros" accepted this
is clearly based on the fact of payment. document only as additional security for its credit and not
b. The surety may, even before paying the principal obligation, as a novation of the contract.
institute proceeding against the debtor under the provisions
of article 1843; but then he must choose one among the rem- CONCLUSION
edies granted by said article, and speci􏰄cally apply for it. 5. Tuason Inc. has the right to recover of the Machuca the sum of
c. And if he does not do so, but brings an action for the recov- P9,663, the value of the note executed by the Tuason in favor of
ery of the amount of the principal obligation, which can be "Manila Compañia de Seguros" which Tuason is under obliga-
maintained only on the fact of the payment of said obligation tion to pay by virtue of a 􏰄nal judgment.
by the surety, the action is groundless and must fail unless 6. However, Machuca need not pay the Tuason the expenses in-
the fact of the payment is proven. curred in the litigation between Tuason and Manila Compañia
d. At any rate this article does not provide for the reimburse- 7. That litigation was originated by the Tuason having failed to
ment of any amount, as is sought by the plaintiff. ful􏰄fill its obligation with Manila Compañia, and it cannot
3. HOWEVER, although Tuason has not yet as paid Manila Com- charge the Machuca with the expenses which it was compelled
pañia the amount of the judgment against it, and even consid- to make by reason of its own fault.
ering that this action cannot be held to come under article 1843 8. Tuason is entitled, however, to the expenses incurred by it in
of the Civil Code, yet the plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought this action brought against the Machuca.
in view of the facts established by the evidence. 9. The judgment appealed from is modi􏰄ed, and the Machuca is
a. Tuason became bound, by virtue of a fi􏰄nal judgment, to sentenced to pay P9,663, with interest thereon at the rate of 10
pay the value of the note executed by it in favor of "Manila per cent per annum from July 19, 1923, when the complaint was
Compañia de Seguros.” 􏰄led until full payment thereof, plus the sum of P1,653.65 for
b. According to the document executed solidarily by the Ma- attorney's fees, without special pronouncement as to cost.
chuca and the Universal Trading, the defendant bound him-
self to pay the plaintiff:
i. as soon as the latter may have become bound & liable
ii. whether or not it shall have actually paid