JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)May 7, 2002

A- de 2002

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Amado De Jesus Martinez Sierra

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia
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.

2 topics · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se inaplicó el Art. 1º del Decreto 1382 de 2000 por ser contrario a la Constitución Política, en relación con la tutela promovida por el ciudadano de la referencia.

En consecuencia, se ordenó enviar el expediente al Tribunal Administrativo del Meta para los efectos legales.

Se envía copia de este auto a los Juzgados Tercero Civil del Circuito de Villavicencio y Civil del Circuito de Acacias (Meta).

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.

See the operative part (4 points)
  1. Primero. Inaplicar, en relacion con la accion de tutela promovida por el ciudadano Amado de Jesus Martinez Sierra, el articulo 1o del Decreto 1382 de 12 de julio de 2000, por ser contrario a la Constitucion Politica conforme a lo expuesto en la parte motiva de este auto.
  2. Segundo. Enviese el expediente en forma inmediata al Tribunal Administrativo del Meta (Magistrado ponente, doctor Alfredo Vargas Morales) para los efectos legales.
  3. Tercero. Para su conocimiento enviese copia de este auto a los Juzgados
  4. Tercero. Civil del Circuito de Villavicencio y Civil del Circuito de Acacias (Meta).
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.

Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

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