A- de 2018
The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.
Reporting justice Diana Constanza Fajardo Rivera
✓Claimant --·Respondent --
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.
- Improcedencia de recursos
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)
Solicitud de revisión del Auto 164/05, mediante el cual se negó la nulidad de la Sentencia T-979/04.
Recuerda la Corte que, de conformidad con el artículo 49 del Decreto 2067 de 1991, los autos que resuelven solicitudes de nulidades no son susceptibles de ser recurridos, lo cual a su vez constituye una aplicación del principio de celeridad que exige que las decisiones del juez constitucional sean cumplidas, sin dilación.
La Sala considera que la petición formulada es improcedente y, por eso, decide RECHAZARLA,
What it decided
Operative part (Resuelve)
✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.
- PRIMERO. RECHAZAR por improcedente la solicitud de revision presentada por el ciudadano Marco Aurelio Sanchez Charry contra el Auto 164 de 2005.
- SEGUNDO. ADVERTIR que contra esta providencia no procede recurso alguno.
- TERCERO. Por intermedio de la Secretaria General de esta Corporacion, INFORMAR a los peticionarios el contenido de este proveido.
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.
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 indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.