JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)August 5, 2010

A- de 2010

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

Reporting justice Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto

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.

Accion De Tutela De Ministerio De Transporte Contra Sentencia De Tribunal Administrativo
  • Niega solicitud aclaración auto A111/10 que negó levantamiento de medida provisional
Solicitud De Aclaración De Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Aplicación del artículo 309 del Código de Procedimiento Civil para su procedencia
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 del Auto número 111 de 2010, mediante el cual se negó el levantamiento de una medida provisional decretada en el proceso de tutela instaurado por la Nación- Ministerio del Transporte contra el Tribunal Administrativo de Cundinamarca.

La Sala advierte que no se está ante verdaderos conceptos o frases que generen duda, por el contrario lo que se pretende realmente es cuestionar la decisión judicial adoptada, antes que dilucidar o aclarar puntos que ofrezcan realmente duda, se niega por improcedente.

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. RESUELVE
  2. NEGAR, por improcedente, la solicitud de aclaración elevada por la ciudadana Lorena Elizabeth Chavarro, en relación con el Auto núm. 111 de 2010, mediante el cual se negó el levantamiento de la medida provisional, decretada mediante Auto del 23 de abril de 2010.
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.