JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 9, 2000

A- de 2000

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

Reporting justice Alvaro Tafur Galvis

✓Claimant Omar Niebles Anchique

✓
Topic · hard data
Solicitud De Nulidad De La Sentencia T-618/99
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.

Nulidad Sentencia De Revision De Tutela
  • Improcedencia por remisión tardía de expediente a la Corte Constitucional
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se denegó la solicitud formulada por el apoderado judicial del accionante para que se decretara la nulidad de la Sentencia T-618/99 proferida por esta Corporación, toda vez que la tardanza en hacer efectiva la remisión del expediente contentivo de los fallos de tutela proferidos por los Juzgados respectivos no se debió a acción o inacción de la Sala Sexta de Revisión de Tutelas o de la Secretaría General de esta Corporación.

Contra la presente providencia no procede recurso alguno.

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. DENEGAR la solicitud formulada por el senor Marcel Silva Romero, apoderado judicial del senor Omar Niebles Anchique, para que se decrete la nulidad de la Sentencia T- 618 de 1999 proferida por la Sala Sexta de Revision de esta Corporacion, en la accion de tutela promovida por Omar Niebles Anchique contra el Fondo de Pasivo Social de la Empresa Puertos de Colombia -Foncolpuertos
  2. Contra la presente providencia no procede recurso alguno.
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.