Potestad financiera de las Comunidades Autónomas

NEGOTORIUM GESTIO

Art. 2144. Whoever voluntarily takes charge of the agency or management of the business or property of another, without any power from the latter, is obliged to continue the same until the termination of the affair and its incidents, or to require the person concerned to substitute him, if the owner is in a position to do so. This juridical relation does not arise in either of these instances:

(1) When the property or business is not neglected or abandoned;

(2) If in fact the manager has been tacitly authorized by the owner.

In the first case, the provisions of Articles 1317, 1403, No. 1, and 1404 regarding unauthorized contracts shall govern.

In the second case, the rules on agency in Title X of this Book shall be applicable.

NATURE OF A NEGOTORIUM GESTIO

 It is not undertaken for profit

 Requisites:

a. There is no authorization on the part of the person who takes charge of the agency or management of the business

b. The property or business is neglected or abandoned

 Circumstances where a negotiorum gestio may arise, according to Sison and Azarraga v. Balgos:

a. The business matter relates to determined things or affairs, and that there be no administrator or representative of the owner charged with the management thereof

b. The idea of express or tacit mandate on the part of the owner is foreign to all, because very often the management of a third person is without the owner’s knowledge

c. The actor is inspired by the beneficent idea of averting losses and damages to the owner or to the interested party

Art. 2145. The officious manager shall perform his duties with all the diligence of a good father of a family, and pay the damages which through his fault or negligence may be suffered by the owner of the property or business under management.

The courts may, however, increase or moderate the indemnity according to the circumstances of each case.

 Thus, the officious manager cannot say that he is not an authorized manager in order to escape liability for any damage arising through his/her fault.

Art. 2146. If the officious manager delegates to another person all or some of his duties, he shall be liable for the acts of the delegate, without prejudice to the direct obligation of the latter toward the owner of the business.

The responsibility of two or more officious managers shall be solidary, unless the management was assumed to save the thing or business from imminent danger.

 General rule: An officious manager is responsible for all the acts of the delegate, and their responsibility shall be solidary. This is without prejudice to the direct obligation of the delegate toward the owner of the business.

 Exception: The responsibility shall not be solidary if the management was assumed to save the thing or business from imminent danger.

Art. 2147. The officious manager shall be liable for any fortuitous event:

(1) If he undertakes risky operations which the owner was not accustomed to embark upon;

(2) If he has preferred his own interest to that of the owner;

(3) If he fails to return the property or business after demand by the owner;

(4) If he assumed the management in bad faith.

Art. 2148. Except when the management was assumed to save property or business from imminent danger, the officious manager shall be liable for fortuitous events:

(1) If he is manifestly unfit to carry on the management;

(2) If by his intervention he prevented a more competent person from taking up the management.

Art. 2149. The ratification of the management by the owner of the business produces the effects of an express agency, even if the business may not have been successful.

Art. 2150. Although the officious management may not have been expressly ratified, the owner of the property or business who enjoys the advantages of the same shall be liable for obligations incurred in his interest, and shall reimburse the officious manager for the necessary and useful expenses and for the damages which the latter may have suffered in the performance of his duties.

The same obligation shall be incumbent upon him when the management had for its purpose the prevention of an imminent and manifest loss, although no benefit may have been derived.

Art. 2151. Even though the owner did not derive any benefit and there has been no imminent and manifest danger to the property or business, the owner is liable as under the first paragraph of the preceding article, provided:

(1) The officious manager has acted in good faith, and

(2) The property or business is intact, ready to be returned to the owner.

Art. 2152. The officious manager is personally liable for contracts which he has entered into with third persons, even though he acted in the name of the owner, and there shall be no right of action between the owner and third persons. These provisions shall not apply:

(1) If the owner has expressly or tacitly ratified the management, or

(2) When the contract refers to things pertaining to the owner of the business.

LIABILITIES OF OFFICIOUS MANAGER AND OWNER

Officious manager is liable: Owner is liable:

 For contracts which he/she has entered into with third persons, even though he/she acted in the name of the third persons

- Unless the owner a) ratifies the

1. When the owner enjoys the advantages of the business, even though he/she has not ratified it

- There is a duty to reimburse the officious manager for the damages

management or b) the contract

b. If the officious manager preferred his own interest over the owner’s manager liable, unless the management was assumed to save the property from imminent danger:

e. If the officious manager is manifestly unfit to carry on the management f. If because of the officious manager’s

intervention he/she prevented a more competent person to take up the management

the latter has suffered by reason of necessary expenses

4. When the property is intact and ready to be returned to the owner, regardless of benefit or imminent danger

Art. 2153. The management is extinguished:

(1) When the owner repudiates it or puts an end thereto;

(2) When the officious manager withdraws from the management, subject to the Administrators created to manage Broadcast City, which was abandoned after the EDSA revolution, ceased when a reorganized Board of Directors demanded that Broadcast City be returned to them.

2. Officious manager repudiates it, too. However the officious manager must require the person concerned or the owner to substitute him/her. He/She cannot withdraw from the business and not leave a substitute.

3. Death, civil interdiction, insanity, or insolvency of the officious manager SOLUTIO INDEBITI

Art. 2154. If something is received when there is no right to demand it, and it was unduly delivered through mistake, the obligation to return it arises.

Art. 2155. Payment by reason of a mistake in the construction or application of a doubtful or difficult question of law may come within the scope of the preceding article.

 Two requisites:

1. There is no right to collect these excess sums 2. The amounts have been paid by mistake (of fact)

- Exception: A mistake in law may also come under solution indebiti if the mistake is brought by a doubtful or difficult question of law

Art. 2156. If the payer was in doubt whether the debt was due, he may recover if he proves that it was not due.

Art. 2157. The responsibility of two or more payees, when there has been payment of what is not due, is solidary.

Art. 2158. When the property delivered or money paid belongs to a third person, the payee shall comply with the provisions of article 1984.

Art. 1984. The depositary cannot demand that the depositor prove his ownership of the thing deposited.

Nevertheless, should he discover that the thing has been stolen and who its true owner is, he must advise the latter of the deposit.

If the owner, in spite of such information, does not claim it within the period of one month, the depositary shall be relieved of all responsibility by returning the thing deposited to the depositor.

If the depositary has reasonable grounds to believe that the thing has not been lawfully acquired by the depositor, the former may return the same.

Art. 2159. Whoever in bad faith accepts an undue payment, shall pay legal interest if a sum of money is involved, or shall be liable for fruits received or which should have been received if the thing produces fruits.

He shall furthermore be answerable for any loss or impairment of the thing from any cause, and for damages to the person who delivered the thing, until it is recovered.

Art. 2160. He who in good faith accepts an undue payment of a thing certain and determinate shall only be responsible for the impairment or loss of the same or its accessories and accessions insofar as he has thereby been benefited. If he has alienated it, he shall return the price or assign the action to collect the sum.

Art. 2161. As regards the reimbursement for improvements and expenses incurred by him who unduly received the thing, the provisions of Title V of Book II shall govern.

Art. 546. Necessary expenses shall be refunded to every possessor; but only the possessor in good faith may retain the thing until he has been reimbursed therefor.

Useful expenses shall be refunded only to the possessor in good faith with the same right of retention, the person who has defeated him in the possession having the option of refunding the amount of the expenses or of paying the increase in value which the thing may have acquired by reason thereof.

Art. 547. If the useful improvements can be removed without damage to the principal thing, the possessor in good faith may remove them, unless the person who recovers the possession exercises the option under paragraph 2 of the preceding article.

Art. 548. Expenses for pure luxury or mere pleasure shall not be refunded to the possessor in good faith;

but he may remove the ornaments with which he has embellished the principal thing if it suffers no injury thereby, and if his successor in the possession does not prefer to refund the amount expended.

Art. 549. The possessor in bad faith shall reimburse the fruits received and those which the legitimate possessor could have received, and shall have a right only to the expenses mentioned in paragraph 1 of Article 546 and in Article 443. The expenses incurred in improvements for pure luxury or mere pleasure shall not be refunded to the possessor in bad faith, but he may remove the objects for which such expenses have been incurred, provided that the thing suffers no injury thereby, and that the lawful possessor does not prefer to retain them by paying the value they may have at the time he enters into possession.

Art. 550. The costs of litigation over the property shall be borne by every possessor.

Art. 551. Improvements caused by nature or time shall always insure to the benefit of the person who has succeeded in recovering possession.

Art. 552. A possessor in good faith shall not be liable for the deterioration or loss of the thing possessed, except in cases in which it is proved that he has acted with fraudulent intent or negligence, after the judicial summons.

A possessor in bad faith shall be liable for deterioration or loss in every case, even if caused by a fortuitous event.

Art. 553. One who recovers possession shall not be obliged to pay for improvements which have ceased to exist at the time he takes possession of the thing.

Art. 2162. He shall be exempt from the obligation to restore who, believing in good faith that the payment was being made of a legitimate and subsisting claim, destroyed the document, or allowed the action to prescribe, or gave up the pledges, or cancelled the guaranties for his right. He who paid unduly may proceed only against the true debtor or the guarantors with regard to whom the action is still effective.

Art. 2163. It is presumed that there was a mistake in the payment if something which had never been due or had already been paid was delivered; but he from whom the return is claimed may prove that the delivery was made out of liberality or for any other just cause.

OTHER QUASI-CONTRACTS

Art. 2164. When, without the knowledge of the person obliged to give support, it is given by a stranger, the latter shall have a right to claim the same from the former, unless it appears that he gave it out of piety and without intention of being repaid.

 The Court discussed the precursor of this article, which was Article 1984 of the Old Civil Code, in De Marcaida v. Redfern:

- For one to recover under the provisions of Art. 1984, the following must be alleged and proved: 1) That the support has been furnished a dependent of one bound to give support but who fails to do so, 2) The support was supplied by a stranger, and 3) The support was given without the knowledge of the person charged

Art. 2165. When funeral expenses are borne by a third person, without the knowledge of those relatives who were obliged to give support to the deceased, said relatives shall reimburse the third person, should the latter claim reimbursement.