JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 14, 2013

A- de 2013

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

Reporting justice Jorge Iván Palacio Palacio

✓Claimant Johanna Giraldo Gomez Y Otro

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.

Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Rechazo cuando recae sobre normas amparadas en sentencias que hicieron tránsito a cosa juzgada
  • Corrección
  • Cumplimiento de requisitos formales
Accion Publica De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Carácter rogado de la competencia
Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad Frente A Funciones Del Contralor General
  • Rechazar recurso de súplica por extemporáneo
  • Recurso de súplica
5 topics · 8 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de Súplica contra el auto del 21 de octubre de 2013 proferido por el Magistrado Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo, por el cual se rechazó la demanda de la referencia por la falta de competencia de la Corporación para decidir sobre la inconstitucionalidad de la norma acusada.

La Sala Plena decide RECHAZAR POR EXTEMPORANEO el recurso de nulidad impetrado.

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. En merito de lo expuesto, la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional,
  2. RESUELVE:
  3. RECHAZAR POR EXTEMPORANEO el recurso de suplica propuesto por Johanna Giraldo Gomez y Eudoro Echeverri Quintana contra el Auto del 21 de octubre 2013, proferido por el magistrado Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo, por medio del cual se rechazo la demanda de inconstitucionalidad presentada contra el inciso 8deg del articulo 268 (parcial) de la Constitucion Politica.
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.