JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)August 13, 2024

A- de 2024

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

Reporting justice Vladimir Fernández Andrade

✓Claimant Paz Sefair Antonio·Respondent --

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 Rechazo Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Finalidad
  • Requisitos de procedencia
  • Incumplimiento de la carga argumentativa
1 topic · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de súplica.

La demanda se rechazó porque no se corrigieron las deficiencias advertidas en el auto de inadmisión.

Al revisar los argumentos del peticionario encontró la Sala Plena que éste no cuestionó la materialidad de lo resuelto en la providencia recurrida, sino que propuso un reproche sobre la técnica de argumentación asumida por la magistrada sustanciadora para surtir el control de admisibilidad, lo cual no se aviene con la naturaleza del recurso de súplica y no permite satisfacer la carga mínima para darle curso al examen de fondo a dicho medio de impugnación.

Con base en lo anterior, se RECHAZÓ la súplica invocada por ausencia del requisito de carga argumentativa.

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 el recurso de súplica presentado por el ciudadano Antonio Paz Sefair en el expediente D-15.907, tras advertir la ausencia de carga argumentativa.
  2. Segundo. A través de la Secretaría General de la Corte Constitucional, COMUNICAR el contenido de esta decisión al demandante, indicándole que contra esta no procede recurso alguno.
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.