G.R. No. L-4179
RAFAEL AZADA Y LARA, plaintiff-appellant, vs. FRANCISCO MARTINEZ Y GARCIA, ET AL., defendants-appellees.
March 21, 1910

FACTS:
On April 16, 1903, Francisco Martinez y Garcia executed a public instrument acknowledging a debt of 7,000 Mexican pesos to Jose Escalante, purportedly for “cash received.” On the same date, Escalante transferred this claim to Rafael Azada y Lara (the plaintiff-appellant) for an equal sum, and Martinez was duly notified of and acknowledged the transfer by affixing his signature. When the debt remained unpaid after its term expired, Azada y Lara sued Martinez and his judicially appointed guardian for payment. The defendants, in their special defense, alleged that the 7,000 pesos was an “imaginary sum” that Escalante had won from Martinez “illegally and fraudulently in a game of monte.” The trial court found in favor of the defendants, acquitting them of the complaint, which Azada y Lara appealed.

ISSUE:
Can a debt originating from an illegal gambling game, which was subsequently acknowledged in a public instrument and transferred to a third party (with the debtor’s knowledge and acknowledgment), be legally enforced?

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, holding that the debt, having originated from an illegal game of chance (monte), is not enforceable. The Court cited Article 1798 of the Civil Code, which prescribes that “The law does not permit any action to claim what is won in a game of chance, luck, or hazard.” Such games produce no civil obligation and, consequently, no action can be brought before the courts for their recovery. The Court further ruled that the execution of a public instrument acknowledging the debt and its subsequent transfer to a third party, even with the debtor’s notification and acknowledgment, does not legalize a debt contracted in an illicit game. These documents cannot lawfully elude the prohibitive provisions of the law, as they do not transform an inherently illegal obligation into a legal and enforceable one.