JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 13, 2007

A- de 2007

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

Reporting justice Alvaro Tafur Galvis

✓Claimant Jorge Enrique Combariza Vs. Oficina De Bonos Pensionales Del Ministerio De Hacienda Y Credito Publico

✓
Topic · hard data
Solicitud De Aclaracion De La Sentencia T-1087 De 2006. Improcedencia De La Solicitud. Debido Proceso En La Aclaracion, Correccion Y Adicion De Providencias. Rechazado Por Improcedente
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.

Corte Constitucional
  • Regulación de la facultad de revisión eventual de acciones de tutela y de la facultad de los jueces y tribunales de notificar la sentencia emitida por la Corte
Juez De Tutela
  • Competencia restringida para modificar órdenes
Solicitud De Aclaración De Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Improcedencia por presentación fuera del término de ejecutoria
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.

  1. Primero. RECHAZAR por improcedente la solicitud formulada por el Jefe de la Oficina Bonos Pensionales del Ministerio de Hacienda y Credito Publico, relativa a que esta Sala aclare la Sentencia T-1087 de 2006
  2. Segundo. Secretaria General comunique esta decision al solicitante, al actor y a la Sala Civil del H. Tribunal Superior de Bogota. Oficiese y remitase copia de esta providencia.
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.