A- de 2025
The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.
Reporting justice Vladimir Fernández Andrade
✓Claimant Rodríguez Rodríguez Edwin Randall·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.
- Demandante debe efectuar razonamiento mínimo para constatar yerro o arbitrariedad
- Requisitos de procedencia
- Incumplimiento de la carga argumentativa
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)
Recurso de súplica.
La demanda se rechazó porque el actor se abstuvo de presentar en el escrito de subsanación, argumentos orientados a subsanar las dificultades identificadas en el auto de inadmisión.
La Sala Plena de la Corporación concluyó que el recurso impetrado no cumplió con la carga argumentativa mínima requerida para habilitar su competencia para emitir un pronunciamiento de fondo y, por ello, decidió RECHAZARLO.
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 falta de carga argumentativa, el recurso de súplica interpuesto por Edwin Randall Rodríguez Rodríguez, en el expediente D-16847, contra del Auto del 23 de septiembre de 2025.
- Segundo. Contra esta providencia no procede recurso alguno.
- Tercero. Ejecutoriada esta decisión, archívese el expediente.
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.