- Statute
- Civil Code
- Article
- Art. 1155
- Topic
- Prescription of Actions
- Status
- In force
- Book
- BOOK III DIFFERENT MODES OF ACQUIRING OWNERSHIP Preliminary Provision
- Title
- TITLE V PRESCRIPTION
- Chapter
- CHAPTER 3 Prescription of Actions
- Formerly
- Art. 1973a of the old Civil Code
- Year
- 1949
- Cited by
- Multiple Supreme Court decisions
The provision
The prescription of actions is interrupted when they are filed before the court, when there is a written extrajudicial demand by the creditors, and when there is any written acknowledgment of the debt by the debtor. (1973a)
Intellegal Wiki · In plain terms
The running of the prescriptive period (deadline) to sue is interrupted, effectively reset, in three situations: when the case is filed in court, when the creditor makes a written extrajudicial demand, or when the debtor acknowledges the debt in writing. Any one of these stops the clock on prescription.
An editorially maintained plain-language explanation of this provision — not legal advice.
Intellegal Wiki · How the courts apply it
In Filcon Ready Mixed v. Ucpb General Insurance Company, the Supreme Court held: An insurer's subrogation claim prescribes with the underlying cause of action (four years for quasi-delict), following Henson v. UCPB which abandoned the Vector doctrine; for suits filed before Vector became final, Article 1155 interruption still applies.
One leading Supreme Court case applying this provision.
Cases applying this article
- Filcon Ready Mixed v. Ucpb General Insurance Company G.R. No. 229877
- Spouses Flavio P. Bautista v. Premiere Development Bank G.R. No. 201881
- Republic of the Philippines v. Antonio V. Bañez G.R. No. 169442
- Juan B. Bañez, Jr. v. Hon. Crisanto C. Concepcion G.R. No. 159508
- Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company [Pldt] v. Roberto R. Pingol G.R. No. 182622
- Philippine Bank of Communications v. Diamond Seafoods Corporation G.R. No. 142420
- People v. Rogelio Bayotas y Cordova G.R. No. 102007
- Jaime Ledesma v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 106646
Other Supreme Court decisions also apply this article.