A Colombian court ruled that residential complexes cannot prohibit pet owners from using common areas or issue fines for animal transit [1].
This decision settles a long-standing conflict between homeowners and building administrations over the limits of internal regulations. As more citizens move into managed complexes, the ruling ensures that private bylaws cannot override fundamental rights regarding pet ownership.
Under the ruling, residential administrations are prohibited from banning pets in areas such as elevators, hallways, and other shared spaces [2]. The court said that complexes cannot issue fines for the presence of dogs in these common areas [1]. This protection applies even if a specific residential regulation or internal manual explicitly prohibits pets [3].
Legal frameworks for these decisions are anchored in Law 675 of 2001 [4], which regulates coexistence and administration in residential complexes. While the court protects the right to transit, it allows administrations to implement specific safety measures. For example, administrations may still require the use of a leash, or a muzzle, in shared spaces to ensure the safety of other residents [2].
This ruling comes as pet ownership remains high across the country. More than 65% of Colombian households live with at least one pet [5]. This high percentage of pet owners means that restrictive bylaws often create widespread friction within apartment buildings and gated communities.
According to a report from Portafolio, no residential complex can prohibit the keeping of pets in their common areas [3]. The decision reinforces that while administrations can manage the order of a property, they cannot eliminate the right of a resident to move through their home environment with their animal companion.
“Conjuntos no pueden hacer multa por perros en áreas comunes.”
This ruling establishes a legal precedent in Colombia that prioritizes the individual right to pet ownership over the autonomous regulatory power of residential administrations. By citing Law 675 of 2001, the court clarifies that internal bylaws are subordinate to broader legal protections, effectively neutralizing 'no-pet' clauses in building contracts and preventing the financial penalization of pet owners.



