JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)June 10, 2015

A- de 2015

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

Reporting justice Myriam Avila Roldán

✓Claimant Jose Elias Guerra De La Espriella

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.

Solicitud De Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Negar por cuanto no se incurrió en ninguna de las causales invocadas
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de nulidad de sentencia.

El señor José Elías Guerra de la Espriella interpuso incidente de nulidad en contra de la sentencia SU378/14, invocando como causales el desconocimiento del precedente judicial en relación con la obligatoriedad de los dictámenes del Comité de Derechos Humanos de la ONU y la posibilidad de exigir su cumplimiento a través de la acción de tutela.

Igualmente, por la violación del derecho al debido proceso, por graves contradicciones e incongruencias en el análisis del requisito de inmediatez.

Al no encontrar acreditadas ninguna de las causales de nulidad que invocó el peticionario para demandar la invalidación de la sentencia SU378/14, la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional decide NEGAR dicha 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.

  1. Primero. NEGAR la solicitud de nulidad presentada por el senor Jose Elias Guerra de la Espriella contra la Sentencia SU- 378 de 2014 proferida por la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional.
  2. Segundo. Comuniquese la presente providencia al peticionario, con la advertencia de 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

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