JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 11, 2001

A- de 2001

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Luis Fernando Mejia Y Otro

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia.
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.

Conflicto De Competencia En Tutela
  • Superior jerárquico común
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se abstuvo de resolver el conflicto de competencia suscitado entre los Tribunales Superiores de los Distritos Judiciales de Cali y Bogotá –Sala Laboral-, para conocer de la acción de tutela promovida por los ciudadanos de la referencia, toda vez que la decisión sobre el particular le corresponde a la Corte Suprema de Justicia como superior común de los citados Tribunales.

En consecuencia, se remite el expediente a esta Corte para que decida sobre el conflicto de competencia aludido.

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. Abstenerse de resolver el conflicto de competencia suscitado entre los Tribunales Superiores de los Distritos Judiciales de Cali y Bogota -Sala Laboral-, para conocer de la accion de tutela promovida por los ciudadanos Luis Fernando Mejia y Ciro Alfonso Sierra.
  2. Segundo. Remitase el expediente para que ella decida sobre el conflicto de competencia aludido a la Corte Suprema de Justicia, por ser esta el superior comun de los Tribunales mencionados.
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.