Court Sets Criteria for the Imposition of Sanctions by the SIC

Law 1480 of 2011, which enacted the Consumer Protection Statute, provides that failure to comply with orders issued in judgments, conciliations, or settlement agreements arising from consumer protection proceedings may give rise to sanctions imposed by the Superintendence of Industry and Commerce (SIC).

These sanctions may include:

• Successive fines equivalent to one-seventh of the current legal monthly minimum wage for each day of delay.

• Temporary closure of the commercial establishment if non-compliance persists, until compliance is demonstrated, with possible law enforcement assistance.

Judicial Limits on the Imposition of Sanctions

In its ruling dated September 2, 2025, the Bogotá Superior Court clarified that the imposition of these sanctions must respect the fundamental right to due process and comply with specific legal criteria.

Key Criteria Established by the Court

1. Procedural Guarantees Must Be Observed

The SIC must strictly follow the procedure set forth in Article 59 of the Statutory Law on the Administration of Justice before imposing any sanction.

2. Non-Compliance Alone Is Not Sufficient

It is not enough to simply prove that a judgment or settlement was not fully complied with. The authority must also demonstrate that the non-compliance resulted from defiance, bad faith, or an unwillingness to comply with the order.

3. Respect for Party Autonomy

The Court emphasized the importance of recognizing the private autonomy of the parties. If the consumer accepts or considers the judgment or settlement fulfilled—even if there were delays—the SIC cannot impose sanctions solely on the basis of late compliance.

The Case at Hand

Applying these principles, the Court revoked a sanction exceeding COP 200 million imposed by the SIC on a construction company for the alleged breach of a settlement agreement related to the delivery of common areas in a building.

WRITTEN BY: LINA DÍAZ

CONTACT US