JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)December 7, 2021

A- de 2021

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

Reporting justice José Fernando Reyes Cuartas

✓Claimant David Clemente Retamoso Castrillon Y Otros

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.

Recurso De Suplica Contra Auto Que Rechaza Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Se confirma decisión de rechazo por incumplirse el presupuesto de suficiencia
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de súplica formulado en contra del auto que rechazó la demanda de inconstitucionalidad de la referencia, por la indebida subsanación.

Teniendo en cuenta que los accionantes no cumplieron con la carga procesal de fundamentar con suficiencia el cargo propuesto, la Sala Plena de la Corporación decidió RECHAZAR el recurso formulado.

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 (3 points)
  1. Primero. RECHAZAR el recurso de suplica presentado por los ciudadanos David Clemente Retamoso Castrillon y Nicolas Felipe Osorio Reyes contra el auto del 9 de noviembre de 2021 por medio del cual se rechazo la demanda correspondiente al expediente D-14445, contentivo de la accion publica de inconstitucionalidad formulada contra articulos 2, 3, 4, 5 y 6 de la Ley 2155 de 2021.
  2. Segundo. Proceda la Secretaria General de la Corte Constitucional a comunicar el contenido de esta decision a los recurrentes, indicandoles que contra esta no procede recurso alguno.
  3. Tercero. En firme esta decision, archivese el expediente.
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.

Appears in the rulingN1 · hard data
✓
José Fernando Reyes Cuartas
Reporting justice
✓
Alberto Rojas Ríos
Magistrado
✓
Alejandro Linares Cantillo
Magistrado
✓
Antonio José Lizarazo Ocampo
Presidente
✓
Cristina Pardo Schlesinger
Magistrado
✓
Diana Constanza Fajardo Rivera
Magistrado
✓
Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado
Magistrado
✓
Jorge Enrique Ibáñez Najar
Magistrado
✓
Paola Andrea Meneses Mosquera
Magistrado
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.