JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 12, 2014

A- de 2014

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 Sala De Seguimiento·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.

Seguimiento Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional En Materia De Derecho A La Salud Y A La Vida
  • Requerimiento de información adicional al Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social sobre estado de afiliación y acceso a servicios de salud de la población
Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional En Materia De Derechos A La Salud Y A La Vida
  • Seguimiento a la orden vigésima novena de la Sentencia T-760 de 2008
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

En el marco del seguimiento a la orden vigésima novena de la Sentencia T-760/08, se hace un requerimiento de información adicional al Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social, sobre el estado de afiliación y acceso a los servicios de salud de la población.

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. Ordenar al Ministerio de Salud y Proteccion Social para que, dentro del termino maximo de cinco (5) dias habiles siguientes al recibo de la comunicacion de este auto, responda de forma precisa los interrogantes planteados en los numerales 5 a 8 de la parte motiva de esta providencia.
  2. Segundo. Proceda la Secretaria General de esta Corporacion a comunicar la presente decision, adjuntando copia de la misma.
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.

Appears in the rulingN1 · hard data
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
Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.