JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)January 29, 1999

A- de 1999

The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.

Reporting justice Eduardo Cifuentes Muñoz

✓Claimant Luis Alberto Caceres Arbelaez

✓
Topic · hard data
Demanda Contra Decreto Ejecutivo Que Es Competencia Del Consejo De Estado.
01

Topics and subtopics of the ruling

✓What the ruling decides and analyzes, as indexed by the Court's case-law reporter's office. Each topic links to every decision that addresses it.

Decreto Ejecutivo Compilador
  • Alcance y competencia
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se confirmó el auto de la referencia, toda vez que la Corte consideró que es obvio que las decisiones del Consejo de Estado sobre los decretos ejecutivos compiladores sólo recaen sobre la compilación misma, pero no pueden afectar las normas materialmente legales que integran esos decretos, cuyo conocimiento ha sido atribuido a la Corte Constitucional.

En consecuencia, cuando la demanda se dirija contra los artículos y contenidos normativos de estos decretos ejecutivos, la Corte Constitucional es competente para pronunciarse sobre ellos, como ocurrió en la Sentencia C-508/96.

En esta ocasión, el demandante no cuestiona el contenido normativo del decreto, desde el punto de vista constitucional, sino que se limita a resaltar defectos atinentes a la compilación como tal.

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
02

What it decided

This decision records no constitutional review holdings. This is common in tutela rulings and orders, where the decision does not concern a legal provision.
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

  1. R E S U E L V E
  2. CONFIRMAR el auto de diciembre diez (10) de mil novecientos noventa y ocho (1998).
Verbatim text · source: operative part of the ruling
03

The bench that decided

We distinguish who appears in the ruling (signature, vote or concurrence) from who probably sat on the Court on that date. The difference is shown by color and shape.

04

How it connects

Each decision is a node in the case-law network: it cites some and is cited by others. Follow the threads.

The document’s networkthe most influential links · node size is how often the Court cites it
constitutional review unification tutela

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.