JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)May 30, 2018

A- de 2018

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

Reporting justice Carlos Libardo Bernal Pulido

✓Claimant Clara Elena Reales Gutierrez

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.

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 aclaración de la Sentencia SU.005/18.

La apoderada judicial de las administradoras de Fondos de Pensiones Colfondos S.A.; Old Mutual S.A., Porvenir S.A. y Protección S.A. adujo que, a pesar de que la sentencia trató casos exclusivamente de pensiones, las reglas de unificación se referían a afiliados al Sistema de Seguridad Social en Pensiones, sin identificar el régimen.

Consideró entonces que no existía claridad acerca de la exclusión Régimen de Ahorro Individual con Solidaridad (RAIS) en la aplicación de dichas reglas.

La Corte considera que ninguna de las Administradoras de Fondos de Pensiones que presentaron la petición de aclaración acredita legitimación en la causa para solicitar la misma y, por eso, la Sala Plena decide RECHAZARLA 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. Primero. RECHAZAR POR IMPROCEDENTE LA SOLICITUD DE ACLARACIÓN de la Sentencia SU-005 de febrero 13 de 2018, proferida por la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional.
  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.

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.