Debate Hermenéutico Sobre la Reticencia en el Contrato de Seguro Vida Deudores en Colombia: Un Asunto Aún Sin Resolver

Abstract

For decades, the jurisprudence of the high courts has debated the issue of misrepresentation (reticence) in debtor life insurance contracts, in order to determine the proper interpretation of Article 1058 of the Colombian Commercial Code. The interpretation has shifted between opposing theses: one argues that, for the relative nullity of the contract to occur, insurers must prove the insured's bad faith and a causal link between the loss and the misrepresentation; the other contends that the law does not require such conditions, and that the annulment of the contract results from the mere act of concealment or inaccurate disclosure regarding the policyholder's or insured's health condition—leading inevitably to the non-payment of the claimed indemnity.

The urgent need of individuals to obtain financial products (such as loans) compels them to enter into life insurance contracts on a daily basis, often without understanding their true scope or without concern for their own health status. In some cases, individuals deliberately conceal certain medical conditions to secure credit approval. On the other hand, insurers often fail to fulfill their duty of disclosure by not providing adequate advice or failing to assess the client's risk profile—frequently to facilitate mass sales of their product (insurance)—a situation exacerbated by their dominant market position. As a result, life insurance contracts present several legal complications that typically arise at the time of the loss and the subsequent claim. In light of these circumstances, the remedies provided by the judiciary—developed over several years—seek to establish a balanced doctrine regarding the phenomenon of reticence in life insurance contracts. However, the theories proposed have not been entirely harmonious between the ordinary and constitutional jurisdictions, creating an uncomfortable tension and, naturally, legal uncertainty and a lack of unified jurisprudence on such a sensitive issue. This article aims to analyze the most significant legal theses adopted by both jurisdictions over the past decade regarding the phenomenon of reticence in debtor life insurance contracts and the resulting relative nullity. The goal is to identify key characteristics that may contribute to the consolidation of a probable legal doctrine applicable to specific cases—a particularly relevant matter in today’s commercial and financial market in our country.