JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)August 31, 2004

A- de 2004

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

Reporting justice Rodrigo Uprimny Yepes

✓Claimant Alberto Navarro Cartagena

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia. Juzgado Segundo Civil Del Circuito De El Espinal Vs. Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo Del Tolima
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
  • Entidad del sector descentralizado por servicios del orden nacional
Accion De Tutela Contra Instituto Colombiano De Desarrollo Rural
  • Conocimiento por jueces de circuito o con categoría de tales
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se remitió el expediente contentivo de la tutela propuesta por el ciudadano de la referencia contra el Instituto Colombiano de Desarrollo Rural –INCODER-, al Juzgado Segundo Civil del Circuito de El Espinal (Tolima), para que la tramite y decida en forma inmediata, toda vez que corresponde a los Jueces de Circuito o con categoría de tales el conocimiento en primera instancia de las acciones de tutela que sean interpuesta contra esta entidad.

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. Remitase el expediente contentivo de la accion de tutela propuesta por el ciudadano Alberto Navarro Cartagena contra el Instituto Colombiano de Desarrollo Rural -INCODER-, al Juzgado
  2. Segundo. Civil del Circuito de El Espinal (Tolima), para que la tramite y decida en forma inmediata.
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 available1
DissentJaime Araujo Rentería
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.