JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)December 2, 1998

A- de 1998

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

Reporting justice Vladimiro Naranjo Mesa

✓Claimant Gerardo Sierra Barreneche

✓
Topic · hard data
Solicitud De Aclaracion De La Sentencia Su.430/98.
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.

Sentencia De Revision De Tutela
  • Improcedencia de aclaración
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se negó la solicitud de aclaración de la Sentencia SU.430/98, no sin antes señalar que la mencionada providencia fue clara en su parte resolutiva, al afirmar que: “…La pensión liquidada se empezará a cancelar a partir del mes siguiente a su liquidación y hacia el futuro, dentro de los 10 primeros días de cada mes”, sin que la misma haya hecho alusión alguna a un posible reconocimiento retroactivo de la pensión de vejez por vía de tutela.

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. NEGAR la solicitud de aclaración de la Sentencia SU-430 del 19 de agosto de 1998, por las razones expuestas en este Auto.
  2. Segundo. Informar al señor Gerardo Sierra Barreneche y al representante legal de Caxdac que contra el presente Auto no procede recurso alguno.
  3. Tercero. ORDENAR que por la Secretaría General de esta Corporación, se comunique este Auto al Juzgado 66 Penal Municipal de Santa Fe de Bogotá.
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.