JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)April 22, 2021

A- de 2021

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

Reporting justice José Fernando Reyes Cuartas

✓Claimant Harold Eduardo Sua Montaña

✓
Topic · hard data
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)

Con el presente auto la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional decide RECHAZAR las dos solicitudes de nulidad presentadas por el señor Harold Eduardo Sua Montaña, por resultar abiertamente improcedentes.

La primera, por estar dirigida contra un auto de trámite y, la segunda porque se funda en la no resolución, antes de la sentencia, de la primera petición.

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.

See the operative part (22 points)
  1. DECISION
  2. Primero. RECHAZAR DE PLANO las solicitudes presentadas por el ciudadano Harold Eduardo Sua Montana indicadas en la parte motiva de esta providencia.
  3. Segundo. Contra la presente providencia no procede ningun recurso.
  4. ANTONIO JOSE LIZARAZO OCAMPO
  5. Presidente
  6. DIANA FAJARDO RIVERA
  7. Magistrada
  8. JORGE ENRIQUE IBANEZ NAJAR
  9. Magistrado
  10. ALEJANDRO LINARES CANTILLO
  11. Magistrado
  12. PAOLA ANDREA MENESES MOSQUERA
  13. Magistrada
  14. GLORIA STELLA ORTIZ DELGADO
  15. Magistrada
  16. CRISTINA PARDO SCHLESINGER
  17. Magistrada
  18. JOSE FERNANDO REYES CUARTAS
  19. Magistrado
  20. ALBERTO ROJAS RIOS
  21. Magistrado
  22. MARTHA VICTORIA SACHICA MENDEZ
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.