JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)March 21, 2019

A- de 2019

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

Reporting justice Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado

✓Claimant Dagoberto Quiroga Collazos

✓
Topic · hard data
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.

Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • No se desconoció precedente jurisprudencial
Solicitud De Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Requisitos formales y materiales de procedencia
  • Negar por cuanto se pretende reabrir debate jurídico
  • Improcedencia por falta de carga argumentativa
2 topics · 4 subtopics · 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 C-101/18.

El memorialista adujo la violación al debido proceso por defecto sustantivo.

Luego de constatar el incumplimiento de los requisitos de procedencia de nulidad contra sentencias de la Corte Constitucional relacionados con la legitimación por activa y temporalidad, la Sala Plena de la Corporación decide RECHAZAR la petición formulada.

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. RECHAZAR la solicitud de nulidad formulada por Dagoberto Quiroga Collazos contra la Sentencia C-101 de 2018, proferida por la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional.
  2. SEGUNDO. Comuniquese la presente providencia al solicitante, con la advertencia de que contra esta decision no procede ningun recurso.
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
DissentLuis Ernesto Vargas SilvaConcurrenceJosé Fernando Reyes Cuartas
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.