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 Luis Alejandro Perea Albarracin·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.

Solicitud De Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Negar por cuanto se pretende reabrir debate jurídico
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de nulidad de sentencia.

El peticionario invoca como causal de nulidad, la elusión arbitraria de análisis de asuntos de relevancia constitucional.

Para la Corte, lo que pretende el incidentante es reabrir un debate que ya ha sido resuelto en el proceso ante la jurisdicción administrativa y en la sentencia SU400/12.

En concordancia con lo anterior, encuentra la Sala que no resulta procedente la causal de nulidad invocada y, por eso, el incidente es NEGADO.

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. CORREGIR el apartado de firmas del Auto 152 de 2015, en el sentido que, en lugar de la firma de la magistrada María Victoria Calle Correa, se incluya la expresión “Impedida”.
  2. SEGUNDO. ORDENAR a la Relatoría de esta corporación que adjunte copia de la presente providencia al Auto 152 de 2015.
  3. TERCERO. Por Secretaría COMUNICAR este auto a los jueces de instancia y ORDENAR a la Sección Primera del Consejo de Estado, que notifique el presente auto de corrección a las partes interesadas en el asunto de la referencia.
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.