- Statute
- Civil Code
- Article
- Art. 1409
- Topic
- Statutory provision
- Status
- In force
- Book
- BOOK IV Obligations and Contracts
- Title
- TITLE II CONTRACTS
- Chapter
- CHAPTER 9 Void and Inexistent Contracts
- Year
- 1949
- Cited by
- Multiple Supreme Court decisions
The provision
Art. 1409. The following contracts are inexistent and void from the beginning:
(1) Those whose cause, object or purpose is contrary to law, morals, good customs, public order or public policy;
(2) Those which are absolutely simulated or fictitious;
(3) Those whose cause or object did not exist at the time of the transaction;
(4) Those whose object is outside the commerce of men;
(5) Those which contemplate an impossible service;
(6) Those where the intention of the parties relative to the principal object of the contract cannot be ascertained;
(7) Those expressly prohibited or declared void by law.
These contracts cannot be ratified. Neither can the right to set up the defense of illegality be waived.
Intellegal Wiki · In plain terms
These contracts are void from the very beginning and produce no effect: those with an unlawful or immoral cause, object, or purpose; absolutely simulated ones; those whose cause or object did not exist; those over things outside commerce; those requiring an impossible service; those whose main object cannot be determined; and those the law expressly forbids. They can never be ratified, and the defense of illegality cannot be waived.
An editorially maintained plain-language explanation of this provision — not legal advice.
Intellegal Wiki · How the courts apply it
In Vicente Manzano, Jr. v. Marcelino Garcia, the Supreme Court held: Affirmed that the pacto de retro sale was void for lack of genuine consent, holding expert testimony unnecessary where signature differences are obvious and Article 1318 the proper basis over Articles 1409 and 1505.
One leading Supreme Court case applying this provision.
Key points
Void or inexistent contracts — e.g. those contrary to law, morals, public order, or public policy, absolutely simulated, or without cause or object — produce no legal effect, cannot be ratified, and the action to declare their nullity does not prescribe.
Cases applying this article
- William Ong Genato v. Benjamin Bayhon G.R. No. 171035
- Heirs of Zoilo Espiritu v. Spouses Maximo Landrito G.R. No. 169617
- Government Service Insurance System (Gsis) v. The Province of Tarlac G.R. No. 157860
- Guiang v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 125172
- Villanueva v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 84464
- The Commoner Lending Corporation v. Rafael Balandra G.R. No. 247646
- Leticia Elizondo Eupena v. Luis G. Bobier G.R. No. 211078
- Spouses May S. Villaluz v. Land Bank of the Philippines G.R. No. 192602
Other Supreme Court decisions also apply this article.