JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 25, 2011

A- de 2011

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

Reporting justice Juan Carlos Henao Pérez

✓Claimant Blanca Edila Palacios Alban·Respondent Sin Información

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.

Aclaracion Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Procedencia dentro del término de ejecutoria, de oficio o a solicitud de parte respecto de conceptos o frases contenidas en la parte resolutiva o que influyan en ella
Accion De Tutela Contra Cajanal En Materia De Sustitucion Pensional
  • Rechazar solicitud de adición de sentencia T-210/11
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de Aclaración y Adición Sentencia.

La memorialista reclama que en la parte resolutiva de la sentencia T-210/11, se establezca cómo debe ser liquidada la prestación que se le reconoce y se diga explícitamente si el amparo fue otorgado de manera definitiva o transitoria.

Se RECHAZA la solicitud impetrada por la accionante.

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.

  1. Primero. RECHAZAR la solicitud de adicion de la sentencia T-210 de 2011 proferida por la Sala Tercera de Revision, presentada por la senora Blanca Edila Palacios Alban.
  2. Segundo. Comuniquese la presente providencia a la peticionaria, con la advertencia que contra esta decision no procede ningun recurso.
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
Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.

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