JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)April 22, 2015

A- de 2015

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

Reporting justice Luis Guillermo Guerrero Pérez

✓Claimant Sandra Patricia Medina Ramirez Y Otros·Respondent Sin Información

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.

1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Los memorialistas solicitaron la nulidad del Auto del 11 de diciembre de 2009, por cuanto, a su juicio, al oficiar el Despacho a la gerente Liquidadora de la Fundación San Juan de Dios para que rindiera el informe solicitado en la providencia censurada, se vinculó al trámite de cumplimiento de la Sentencia SU484/08; a quien carecía de legitimación en la causa por activa.

La Sala precisa que las solicitudes de nulidad contra autos de trámite dictados por la Corporación en materia de revisión de tutelas o en materia del cumplimiento de las mismas, como el caso del auto que se impugna, no proceden.

En tal sentido, decide RECHAZAR por improcedente, la solicitud de nulidad presentada.

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. RESUELVE
  2. RECHAZAR por improcedentes, las solicitudes de nulidad presentadas por los señores Sandra Patricia Medina Ramírez y Jorge Antonio Castro Galvis, contra el Auto del 11 de diciembre de 2009, proferido por este Despacho.
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.