How to serve a lawsuit by email in Colombia (art. 8, Ley 2213 of 2022)

1. When article 8 applies

   Ley 2213 of 2022, promulgated on 13 June 2022 (Diario Oficial 52.064), made Decreto Legislativo 806 of 2020 permanent. Its article 8 lets notifications that must be made in person be made by sending the court order as a data message to the electronic address or site provided by the party requesting notice, with no prior summons and no physical or virtual aviso.

   Paragraph 1 extends the rule to any proceeding: pre-trial evidence, ordinary and special declaratory proceedings, monitorio, enforcement proceedings or any other kind.

   Article 8 coexists with notice under articles 291 and 292 of the Código General del Proceso (CGP), but they are two separate regimes, each with its own requirements, and the Supreme Court has warned they must not be mixed (STC7684-2021, STC11127-2022). Administrative litigation follows its own rule (CPACA art. 199, amended by Ley 2080 of 2021), which this guide does not cover.

2. The requirements, one by one

   The text of article 8 places five burdens on the party giving notice:

   • Send the court order (the auto admisorio or the mandamiento de pago) as a data message to the defendant's address (paragraph 1).
   • Send by the same means the documents to be served for the traslado: the complaint, its exhibits and, if there was one, the amended filing (paragraph 1).
   • State under oath that the address is the one used by the person to be notified (paragraph 2).
   • Report how the address was obtained (paragraph 2).
   • Attach the supporting evidence, in particular communications sent to the person to be notified (paragraph 2).

   The Supreme Court has held these are the only requirements: the Civil Chamber in STC16733-2022 and the Labour Chamber in STL7023-2023 (the statute «does not specify any additional requirement»). Demanding others, as the appellate court did in the case decided by STC4737-2023, is excessive formalism.

   If the complaint and its exhibits were already sent to the defendant when it was filed, article 6 limits personal notice to sending the auto admisorio.

   Open the printable checklist

3. The sworn statement on the address and its source

   The oath «is understood to be given with the request»: it needs no separate formula and may appear in the complaint. Even so, it is prudent to repeat it in the memorial informing the court of the notification, together with how the address was obtained.

   The usual sources are prior communications between the parties, the commercial registry at the chamber of commerce, the RUT tax registry, the signed contract and the defendant's official website. In T-404/2025 the Constitutional Court upheld notice sent to the address listed in the defendant's RUT in a non-tax proceeding.

   Paragraph 2 lets the judge ask chambers of commerce, superintendencies and other bodies for addresses, or use those published on websites or social networks. In C-420/2020 the Constitutional Court clarified that a web search of this kind works, in principle, only for natural persons who appear in no public registry.

   The evidence of the source is filed with the notification: earlier emails in their original format, screenshots, the commercial registry or RUT document, the contract.

4. What counts as delivery: receipt or access

   Paragraph 3 says terms start running when the sender receives an acknowledgement of receipt or access by the recipient to the message can otherwise be established. That is the condition the Constitutional Court set in C-420/2020, which Ley 2213 wrote into the text.

   For the Supreme Court, the acknowledgement «is nothing other than confirmation that the message reached its destination», and it may be proved by any means: a voluntary acknowledgement by the recipient, an automatic one or a receipt-confirmation system, a record from an authorised postal company, or documents provided by the plaintiff (STC16733-2022). Acceptance of the message by the recipient's mail server is an automated communication of that kind (Ley 527 of 1999, arts. 20, 21 and 24).

   There is no need to prove the defendant opened the email. In its ruling of 3 June 2020 (case 11001-02-03-000-2020-01025-00) the Supreme Court explained that tying notice to opening would leave its effect to the recipient's whim. Opens and downloads serve as supporting circumstantial evidence.

   A hard bounce, on the other hand, means the message did not arrive: there is no notice, and the address must be corrected and the message sent again.

5. Complete after two business days, and when the term runs

   Under paragraph 3, personal notice is deemed made once two business days have passed after the message was sent. The Supreme Court distinguishes two moments (STC10689-2022, and STC8435-2023, which unified the criterion):

   • Notice complete: by legal presumption, two business days after sending.
   • The start of the term to answer: as a general rule, the next business day, unless the plaintiff or the judge notices the message was not delivered, or the party alleging nullity raises the question of receipt as a matter of evidence.

   Business days exclude Saturdays, Sundays, public holidays (Ley 51 of 1983) and days of judicial recess or on which the court is closed (CGP art. 118).

   Some courts count from the acknowledgement of receipt. Every computed date should therefore be treated as an estimate, and the length of each term is whatever the court order states.

   Calculate when notice is complete and the term

6. What to file with the court

   Once the message is sent, the attorney informs the court of the notification in a memorial. It should include:

   • The case reference: court, the 23-digit radicado, parties and type of proceeding.
   • The date and time of sending in Colombian legal time, the destination address and the order sent with its date, plus the list of exhibits.
   • The sworn statement on the address and how it was obtained.
   • The evidence of the address.
   • The record of sending and delivery, with the message in its original format (.eml), which is how CGP art. 247 weighs a data message.
   • The computation: the date notice is complete and when the term starts.

   The memorial is sent from the email registered in the Registro Nacional de Abogados (Ley 2213, arts. 3 and 5; courts check it, as STC3134-2023 notes), copying the other parties whose channel is known (art. 3).

   The judge may not require the plaintiff to produce a delivery record or acknowledgement of receipt on pain of tacit abandonment: receipt is argued in a nullity motion, and that is where the evidence matters (STC8435-2023).

7. If the defendant alleges nullity

   Paragraph 5 requires the party claiming to be affected to state under oath, when requesting nullity, that they did not learn of the order, and to comply with articles 132 to 138 of the CGP. That oath is not enough on its own: the judge must weigh the whole proceeding and all the evidence (C-420/2020).

   The ground is CGP art. 133(8), and art. 134 allows it to be raised even after judgment or during enforcement. Lack of notice also opens the extraordinary review remedy (CGP arts. 355 and 356), with a maximum of five years.

   That is why proof of the notification must be kept complete and verifiable for years: the original message, the destination server's acceptance, the file fingerprints and the time of every event.

8. Mistakes to avoid

   • Mixing article 8 with the summons or aviso of CGP articles 291 and 292.
   • Sending the order without the exhibits for the traslado.
   • Reporting an address without saying how it was obtained or filing the evidence.
   • Relying on a «sent» screenshot alone when the defendant swears the message never arrived: that is the line of STC690-2020 and paragraph 350 of C-420/2020.
   • Carrying on after a bounce.
   • Leaving out of the message the date of the order and when notice is deemed complete. Article 8 does not require it (STC4737-2023), but including it costs nothing and removes an argument.

An informative summary, not legal advice. The validity of each notification is decided by the judge hearing the case. Published September 26, 2026