JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)September 2, 2020

A- de 2020

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

Reporting justice José Fernando Reyes Cuartas

✓Claimant Humberto Rafael Mendez Rojas

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.

Recurso De Suplica Contra Auto Que Rechaza Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Improcedencia por cuanto el recurso de súplica no presenta argumentos que desvirtúen las razones constitutivas del rechazo de la demanda
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de súplica.

La demanda fue rechazada porque el escrito de subsanación presentado no corrigió los yerros identificados en el auto de inadmisión.

Por estar totalmente de acuerdo con la magistrada sustanciadora, la Sala Plena de la Corporación decidió CONFIRMAR el auto cuestionado.

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. CONFIRMAR el auto del 22 de septiembre de 2020, a traves del cual se rechazo la demanda correspondiente al expediente D-13820, formulada por el ciudadano Humberto Rafael Mendez Rojas contra los apartes "dentro del ano anterior" y "celebracion de contratos", contenidos en el numeral 3 (parcial) del articulo 43 de la Ley 136 de 1994, "[p]or la cual se dictan normas tendientes a modernizar la organizacion y el funcionamiento de los municipios"28F29.
  2. Segundo. Proceda la Secretaria General de la Corte Constitucional a comunicar el contenido de esta decision a los recurrentes.
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.