PEOPLE VS.

BORROMEO
Doctrine:
The admission of the accused of the existence of a marriage is considered strong proof of its
validity. In the absence of any counter presumption or evidence special to the case, persons living
together in apparent matrimony are presumed to be married. The law presumes marriage, and
the burden of proof lies on the party challenging its existence.
Facts:
At high noon on July 3, 1981, the four-year-old niece of Susana & Elias Borromeo told Matilde
Taborada (mother of Susana) that Susana was screaming because Elias was killing her. Taborada
told her to inform her son, Geronimo Taborada. Geronimo, in turn, told his father and together,
they went to Susana’s hut. There they found Susana’s lifeless body next to her crying infant and
Elias mumbling incoherently still with the weapon in his hands. The accused-appellant, Elias, said
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 contract issued on their wedding
day and after that. However, in his testimony (12/12/1981), he admitted that the victim was his
wife and that they were married in a chapel by a priest named Father Binghay of Guadalupe.
Issue: Does the non-execution of a marriage contract render a marriage void?
Ruling: In the view of the law, a couple living together with the image of being married, 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 capacity 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.
The mere fact that no record of the marriage exists in the registry of marriage does not invalidate
said marriage, as long as in the celebration thereof, all requisites for its validity are present. The
forwarding of a copy of the marriage certificate to the registry is not one of said requisites. (Pugeda
vs. Trias, 4 SCRA 849)
The appealed decision is AFFIRMED and the indemnity increased from 12,000 to 30,000.

The validity of marriage depends on the presence of the essential and the formal requisites. The
essential requisites under Article 2 of the Family Code consist of the (1) legal capacity of the
contracting parties who must be male and female; and (2) consent freely given in the presence of
the solemnizing officer.