JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 15, 2017

A- de 2017

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

Reporting justice Jorge Iván Palacio Palacio

✓Claimant Contraloria General De Bogota

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.

Solicitud De Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Denegar por cuanto no existió vulneración del debido proceso
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de nulidad de la Sentencia T-416/16.

El apoderado de la Contraloría General de Bogotá formula el incidente, alegando que se contrarió el precedente constitucional establecido en las sentencias de unificación 837/02, 253/13 y 554/14, así como el fallo de tutela 297/06.

La Corte concluye que no se vulneró el derecho al debido proceso, en tanto la Contraloría no logró demostrar que la providencia atacada incurrió en alguna de las causales que ha desarrollado la jurisprudencia de la Corporación.

Precisa, que los argumentos expuestos sólo reflejan el inconformismo con la decisión adoptada, lo cual despoja de eficacia la solicitud de nulidad contra una sentencia de tutela.

DENEGADA

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. DENEGAR la nulidad de la sentencia T-416 de 2016, solicitada por la Contraloria de Bogota D.C.
  2. Segundo. Contra esta 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.

Separate opinions — text available2
ConcurrenceJorge Iván Palacio PalacioConcurrenceGloria Stella Ortiz Delgado
Official text from the case-law reporter · the most valuable part of the ruling: the positions that did not carry the majority.
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.