JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 22, 2011

A- de 2011

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

Reporting justice Nilson Elías Pinilla Pinilla

✓Claimant Carlos Gabriel Quiñonez Quintero·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.

Incidente De Nulidad
  • Improcedencia en procesos que se adelantan ante la Corte Constitucional
Accion De Tutela Contra Hospital
  • Denegar solicitud de nulidad de sentencia T-355/10 por inobservancia del principio de inmediatez
4 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Nulidad Sentencia.

El memorialista sustenta la solicitud de nulidad en la causal de cambio de jurisprudencia.

A juicio del peticionario, la Sala Sexta de Revisión, al pronunciarse sobre el requisito de inmediatez, modificó la doctrina constitucional en la materia.

La Sala encuentra que la decisión de la Sala de Revisión cuya nulidad se pretende se basó fundamentalmente en la improcedencia causada por la inobservancia del principio de inmediatez y siempre acató la jurisprudencia, sin alterar precedente alguno.

DENEGADA.

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. DENEGAR la solicitud de nulidad de la sentencia T-355 de mayo 11 de 2010, proferida por la Sala Sexta de Revision de esta corporacion.
  2. Segundo. Contra esta providencia no procede recurso alguno.
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.

Separate opinions — text available1
ConcurrenceMaría Victoria Calle Correa
Official text from the case-law reporter · the most valuable part of the ruling: the positions that did not carry the majority.
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.