Payment & Performance- Part 1.Article 1231-1239 Extinguishment of Obligation Obligations & Contracts

The video begins by welcoming viewers and indicating that this is the last chapter on obligations before moving to contracts. The main topic for this session is the different modes of extinguishment of obligations, specifically focusing on payment, as enumerated in Article 1231. Payment is defined broadly by Article 1232 as not only the delivery of money but also the performance in any other manner of an obligation, emphasizing the necessity of a pre-existing obligation for payment to occur.

Article 1233 addresses when a debt is considered paid, outlining two requisites: integrity of the prestation (complete fulfillment) and identity of the prestation (delivering the exact thing or service agreed upon). The video explains that incomplete or irregular fulfillment does not extinguish an obligation, using an example of a partial monetary payment. It also highlights the debtor's burden of proof to show the obligation has been discharged, often through a receipt.

Article 1234 introduces the concept of substantial performance in good faith, allowing the obligor to recover as if there was strict fulfillment, less damages. An example illustrates this with a seller who, despite diligent effort, could not deliver the full quantity due to a shortage. Article 1235 discusses waiver: if the obligee accepts an incomplete or irregular performance knowing its flaws and without protest, the obligation is deemed fully complied with, based on the principle of estoppel. The video clarifies that no specific form of protest is required, just clear dissent.

Article 1236 details payment by a third person. A creditor is not bound to accept payment from a third person without interest in the obligation, unless stipulated otherwise. If a third person pays for another, they may demand reimbursement, but if payment was without the debtor's knowledge or against their will, recovery is limited to the extent the debtor was benefited. The concepts of 'reimbursement' and 'subrogation' are introduced, with subrogation granting the payer the rights of the original creditor, including any accessory obligations like mortgages or guarantees. Examples illustrate scenarios with and without debtor consent.

The video presents problem scenarios to solidify understanding of payment by a third person. One problem involves an insolvent debtor and whether a third-party payer can foreclose a mortgage if payment was made without consent. Another problem explores recovery when a third party pays an amount greater than the actual remaining debt, without the debtor's knowledge. Article 1237 is discussed, emphasizing that a third party paying without the debtor's knowledge or against their will cannot compel the creditor to subrogate them in their rights.

The distinction between subrogation and reimbursement is explained: subrogation allows recourse to accessory obligations (like mortgages), while reimbursement is purely a personal action to recover the amount paid. Article 1238 covers payment made by a third person intending not to be reimbursed, which is considered a donation requiring the debtor's consent for the donation to be valid. However, the payment itself is valid as to the creditor who accepted it. An example clarifies when such a payment is deemed a donation and its implications for reimbursement.

Article 1239 addresses payment made by someone lacking free disposal of the thing due or capacity to alienate it. Such a payment is invalid, without prejudice to Article 1427. 'Free disposal' means the thing is free from claims or liens, and 'capacity to alienate' refers to not being incapacitated to enter contracts. The creditor cannot be compelled to accept such a payment. The video concludes, promising more discussions on other provisions soon.