JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)March 14, 2001

A- de 2001

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

Reporting justice Jaime Araujo Rentería

✓Claimant Luis Alfonso Velasco Parrado

✓
Topic · hard data
Recurso De Suplica Contra Auto Que Rechazo La Demanda
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.

4 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se revocó el Art. 1° del auto proferido por el magistrado ponente del proceso D-3394, y, en su lugar, admitirá la demanda contra el Art. 1 de la Ley 141 de 1961, en los términos propuestos por el demandante.

En consecuencia, se devolverá el expediente al despacho del Magistrado correspondiente, para que continúe su trámite.

Se ordenó notificar sobre esta decisión a los demandantes, haciéndoles saber que contra ella 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.

See the operative part (7 points)
  1. R E S U E L V E :
  2. Primero. Revocar el artículo
  3. primero. del auto de proferido el 16 de febrero de 2001, por el magistrado ponente del proceso D-3394.
  4. Segundo. Admitir la demanda presentada por los ciudadanos Luis Alfonso Velasco Parrado y Hever Maradiago, contra el artículo 1 de la ley 141 de 1961.
  5. Tercero. Notificar esta decisión a los demandantes, haciéndoles saber que contra ella no procede recurso alguno.
  6. Cuarto. Devolver el expediente al despacho del magistrado correspondiente, para que continúe su trámite.
  7. Quinto. Por Secretaría General anéxese al expediente copia de este auto.
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.