Quorum and Decisions in Virtual Assemblies in Horizontal Property


By: Dr. César Augusto Pazos A., Attorney (Universidad Libre), Master's in Administrative Law and specialist in Environmental and Urban Law, Academic Researcher

This article was published in March 2021 and describes the COVID-19 health-emergency rules in force at that time, which may no longer apply. It is kept as a historical reference.

The health emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic was extended until May 31, 2021 by the National Government, and horizontal property assemblies must be held, which means that virtual meetings remain the appropriate mechanism for doing so. This situation has raised many questions among administrators, co-owners, and administrative bodies about holding horizontal property assemblies, arriving in a cascade, along with the different positions and likely answers that have appeared.

If you need advice on holding your Assembly, contact us by clicking here.

It is important to keep in mind that the pandemic has not ended, that deadlines are expiring, and that it is mandatory to hold the Ordinary General Assembly in the horizontal property, thereby complying not only with the legal provisions but with the responsibilities of effective administration. The following points seek to give clear answers to the questions most frequently raised with us about quorum and decisions in horizontal property:

1. Virtual assemblies remain authorized in 2021. They will surely endure, since they bring many benefits in time, cost, monitoring of quorum and attendance, and above all a great deal of organization.

1. It is necessary to distinguish non-in-person assemblies from virtual ones. Although they may seem the same, fundamentally they are not. Virtual assemblies keep the same characteristics as an in-person assembly in terms of attendance, quorum, and majorities for decision-making.

1. Each member or co-owner is responsible for having the means needed to take part in the non-in-person or mixed meeting. This means technological issues cannot be offered as an excuse.

1. Key point: For non-in-person meetings, when the rule refers to "all the partners or members," this is understood to mean those who take part in the non-in-person meeting, provided that the number of participants needed to deliberate under the law or bylaws is present. (Decree 1074 of 2015, cited by Decree 176 of 2021)

1. The legal representative must record in the minutes the continuity of the necessary quorum throughout the meeting. They must also verify the identity of virtual participants to ensure they are in fact the partners, their proxies, or the members of the board.

1. The rules on non-in-person meetings apply equally to mixed meetings, understood as those that allow both physical and virtual presence of the partners, their proxies, or the board members.

Although there are diverse and contradictory positions, it can be concluded that virtual assemblies keep the same characteristics and principles as in-person assemblies regarding decisions and quorum, and that narrow interpretations that seek to downplay this good technological alternative in times of pandemic should be avoided.

At Consejurídico #WeWantToBeThere

Source: Decree 1074 of 2015, Decree 398 of 2020, Decree 579 of 2020, and Decree 176 of 2021.

El asistente jurídico digital de Jurídiconline analiza tu situación específica. La revisión inicial es gratuita.