Virtual owners' meetings in Spain: when they are legally valid

Half past nine at night, folding chairs in the garage, item four on the agenda still far away and half the building glancing at the clock. That ritual is no longer the only way to make decisions about a Spanish apartment building. The virtual owners' meeting (or the hybrid one, with some neighbours in the hallway and others connected from the sofa) is now a real alternative: it is valid if the notice of meeting expressly provides for it and the identity, participation and vote of every attendee are guaranteed.

That said, holding it any old way is a recipe for the first unhappy neighbour to overturn the resolutions. Let's look at what its validity rests on under Spanish law, what the notice must say, how identity and votes are verified, what happens with the minutes, and when a virtual meeting can be challenged.

Is a meeting by videoconference valid?

Yes, although it pays to know the ground you are standing on.

Spain's Horizontal Property Law (the LPH, which governs communities of owners) neither prohibits nor yet expressly regulates meetings by videoconference in common-law territory. The only express national rule was Royal Decree-Law 8/2021, which allowed them during the pandemic (with one central condition: the secretary had to verify the identity of attendees and record it in the minutes) and which expired on 31 December 2021.

That text, however, left the mould.

Since then, Spanish courts have been upholding virtual and hybrid meetings where the notice provided for them and those guarantees of identity, participation and voting were respected, because nothing in the law forbids them. In Catalonia, moreover, regional civil law expressly allows attendance by videoconference where the bylaws provide for it or the meeting so agrees. The gap in national law has an expiry date: a reform of the LPH is making its way through the Spanish parliament to expressly incorporate videoconference meetings, digital minute books and email notifications. Until it arrives, the armour of your virtual meeting is purely procedural: a well-drafted notice and documented guarantees.

What must the notice of meeting say?

The notice follows the usual rules of article 16 of the LPH (who convenes it, the agenda, place, day and time, and at least six days' notice for the ordinary annual meeting) with a digital translation: the "place" now also means the platform. If the notice does not announce the virtual format, holding the meeting by videoconference is the shortest route to a challenge, because you will have changed the conditions of attendance without warning anyone.

A well-drafted virtual notice includes:

• The format of the meeting: virtual or hybrid, with the in-person option where it exists
• The platform, the access link and basic technical instructions
• An alternative channel for anyone unable or unsure how to connect: in-person attendance, telephone or a proxy vote
• How, and by when, to send a written proxy

That alternative channel is not a courtesy: it is the defence against the argument that an owner was shut out by the digital divide. The hybrid format is in fact the hardest to attack, because nobody can claim the door was closed on them. Community management software such as Vecinly handles the operational side: the notice goes out with the link, the agenda and the proxy register in one place, with a record of who received it.

How are identity and votes verified?

The golden rule is still the one the pandemic-era rule established: the secretary verifies the identity of each attendee and records it in the minutes. In practice there are several reasonable routes: camera on when identifying yourself, an ID document shown to the camera in case of doubt, or access through an individual link or personal credentials that only each owner holds. With voting, the requirement is traceability. Every vote must be recorded by name (who votes what) because under the horizontal property regime resolutions are counted both by owners and by ownership quotas, and a simple count of raised hands on screen cannot reconstruct that double tally if someone disputes it later.

Remote proxy voting works exactly as it does in an in-person meeting: article 15 of the LPH requires written authorisation, and a signed document sent scanned or by email before the meeting is perfectly sufficient. A note from someone who has drafted many sets of minutes: take a roll call at the start of the session and repeat it before each vote; connections dropping mid-count is the classic that ends up in court.

The minutes and the signatures

The minutes of a virtual meeting are the same ones required by article 19 of the LPH: place and date, who convened it, ordinary or extraordinary character, attendees present and represented, the agenda and the resolutions with their voting results. The only extra layer is expressly recording the virtual format and that the identity of connected attendees was verified by the secretary.

They are closed with the signatures of the president and the secretary, at the end of the meeting or within the following ten calendar days, and sent to all owners. Electronic signatures are acceptable, and resolutions are enforceable from the moment they are adopted, without waiting for that delivery. Recording the session is not compulsory, but keeping the recording until the challenge deadlines have passed is cheap insurance; announce the recording at the start out of respect for data protection rules.

Can a virtual meeting be challenged?

Yes, through exactly the same routes as article 18 of the LPH: resolutions contrary to the law or the bylaws, seriously harmful to the community, or adopted in abuse of rights. The general deadline is three months, extended to one year where the resolution is contrary to the law or the bylaws. Going virtual creates no new grounds for a challenge; it creates new ways of committing the old ones. The typical weak flanks are four: a format not announced in the notice, attendee identification nobody can prove, an owner who tried to take part and could not because of failures attributable to the organisers, and votes whose result cannot be reconstructed. All four are cured with the same treatment: provide for it in the notice and document it in the minutes.

Legal note: to bring a challenge you must have standing (having voted against and had it recorded, been absent, or been unduly deprived of your vote) and, as a general rule, be up to date with your community payments or have deposited the disputed debt with the court.

A virtual meeting is not a second-class meeting: it is the same meeting in a different room, and when it is well run it tends to bring higher attendance and fewer decisions taken by four exhausted neighbours at midnight. The order of business is the usual one, just more visible: a notice that announces the format, verified identity, traceable votes and minutes that tell the whole story. Take care of those four points and you can vote from the sofa with resolutions as solid as any adopted in the garage.

Information updated July 2026. This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It refers to Spanish law.