JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 4, 2007

A- de 2007

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

Reporting justice Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra

✓Claimant Gloria Fanny Nieto Franco Vs. Iss Y Otra

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia Entre El Tribunal Administrativo De Cundinamarca Y El Juzgado Primero Penal Del Circuito De Sogamoso. Ordena Remitir El Expediente Al Juzgado Primero Penal Del Circuito De Sogamoso
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.

Conflicto De Competencia En Tutela
  • Competencia de juez del circuito
Conflicto De Competencia Entre Autoridades De Diferentes Jurisdicciones
  • Competencia de la Corte Constitucional para decidir el conflicto de competencia
3 topics · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
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.

See the operative part (4 points)
  1. PRIMERO. REMITIR el expediente contentivo de la accion de tutela interpuesta por Gloria Fanny Nieto Franco contra el Instituto de Seguros Sociales y la Empresa Social del Estado Policarpa Salavarrieta al Juzgado
  2. Primero. Penal del Circuito de Sogamoso, quien debera asumir el conocimiento de la accion de amparo.
  3. SEGUNDO. Por Secretaria General COMUNIQUESE al Tribunal Administrativo de Cundinamarca, Seccion Tercera, Subseccion A, la decision adoptada en esta providencia, con el fin de que tenga conocimiento sobre lo aqui resuelto por la Corte Constitucional en relacion con el conflicto de competencia.
  4. Comuniquese,
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.

Separate opinions — text available1
DissentJaime Araujo Rentería
Official text from the case-law reporter · the most valuable part of the ruling: the positions that did not carry the majority.
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
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

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