JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)May 10, 2000

A- de 2000

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Jose Bernardo Ossa Ossa

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencias
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.

Conflicto De Competencia En Tutela
  • Juzgados de distintos distritos judiciales
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se abstuvo de resolver el conflicto de competencia suscitado entre dos Juzgados de Familia de Medellín y de Bogotá, en la tutela promovida por el accionante contra los Ministros de Hacienda y Crédito Público y de Educación Nacional, así como contra el Director del Departamento Administrativo de la Función Pública y, en su lugar, se ordenó enviar el expediente a la Sala de Casación Civil y Agraria de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, como quiera que los mencionados juzgados pertenecen a distintos distritos judiciales, de los cuales es esa Corporación el superior común.

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. Primero. Abstenerse de resolver el conflicto de competencia suscitado entre los Juzgados
  2. Sexto. de Familia de Medellin y
  3. Primero. de Familia de Santafe de Bogota, en la accion de tutela promovida por Jose Bernardo Ossa Ossa, contra los Ministros de Hacienda y Credito Publico y de Educacion Nacional, asi como contra el Director del Departamento Administrativo de la Funcion Publica y, en su lugar, se ordena el envio del expediente a la Sala de Casacion Civil y Agraria de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, para que por ella se adopte la decision que corresponda.
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
Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.

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