JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 21, 2011

A- de 2011

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

Reporting justice Jorge Ignacio Pretelt Chaljub

✓Claimant Ramon Francisco Cardenas Ramirez·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)

Corrección Sentencia.

Con el presente auto se ordena corregir el primer párrafo del numeral 1.3.6, del acápite de intervenciones, de la Sentencia C-277/11en el entendido de que el nombre del interviniente en su calidad de apoderado de la Superintendencia de Industria y Comercio es el ciudadano Ramón Francisco Cárdenas Ruiz y no Fernán Ignacio Bejarano Arias, como erróneamente quedó registrado en la Sentencia en mención.

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. ORDENAR a la Relatoría y a la Secretaría General de la Corte Constitucional, corregir el primer párrafo del numeral 1.3.6. de la sentencia C-277 de 2011, y reemplazarlo por el siguiente texto:
  2. "En el término previsto, el doctor Ramón Francisco Cárdenas Ramírez, actuando como apoderado de la Superintendencia de Industria y Comercio, intervino en el juicio de constitucionalidad del artículo 8 de la ley 1340 de 2009, solicitando se declare la INEXEQUIBILIDAD"
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.

Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.