People Vs.

Borromeo 133 SCRA 106 (Persons and Family Relations)

Facts: At high noon on July 3, 1981, the four year old niece of Susana & Elias B
orromeo told Matilde Taborada (mother of Susana) that Susana was screaming becau
se Elias was killing her. Taborada told her to inform her son, Geronimo Taborada
. Geronimo, in turn, told his father and together, they went to Susanas hut. Ther
e they found Susanas lifeless body next to her crying infant and Elias mumbling i
ncoherently still with the weapon in his hands. The accused-appellant, Elias, sa
id that because they were legally and validly married, he should only be liable
for homicide and not parricide. He thinks such because there was no marriage contrac
t issued on their wedding day and after that. However, in his testimony, he admi
tted that the victim was his wife and that they were married in a chapel by a pr
iest.

Issue: Does the non-execution of a marriage contract render a marriage void?

Held: In the view of the law, a couple living together with the image of being m
arried, are presumed married unless proven otherwise. This is attributed to the
common order of society. Furthermore, the validity of a marriage resides on the
fulfillment or presence of the requisites of the marriage which are : legal capa
city and consent. The absence of the record of such marriage does not invalidate
the same as long as the celebration and all requisites are present.

Person living together in apparent matrimony are presumed, in the absence of any
counter presumption or evidence special to the case, to be in fact married. The
reason is that such is the common order of society, and if the parties were not
what they thus hold themselves out as being, they would be living in constant v
iolation of decency and law. (Son Cui vs. Guepangco, 22 Phil. 216). And, the mer
e fact that no record of the marriage exists in the registry of marriage does no
t invalidate said marriage, as long as in the celebration thereof, all requisite
s for its validity are present. The forwarding of a copy of the marriage certifi
cate to the registry is not one of said requisites. (Pugeda vs. Trias, 4 SCRA 84
9). The appealed decision is AFFIRMED and the indemnity increased from 12,000 t
o 30,000