JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)December 3, 2020

A- de 2020

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

Reporting justice Alberto Rojas Ríos

✓Claimant Juan Sebastian Gomez Hurtado

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
2 topics · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de súplica.

El magistrado sustanciador rechazó la demanda tras considerar que, si bien el demandante hizo un esfuerzo por implementar las correcciones indicadas en el auto de inadmisión, no logró subsanar los defectos relativos a la especificidad y pertinencia y, por tanto, no se estructuró un verdadero cargo de inconstitucionalidad.

Tras considerar que el recurso interpuesto no cumple con los requisitos argumentativos para prosperar, 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 veintinueve (29) de octubre de dos mil veinte (2020), mediante el cual el magistrado Jose Fernando Reyes Cuartas rechazo la demanda de inconstitucionalidad formulada por el ciudadano Juan Sebastian Gomez Hurtado contra el articulo 45 (parcial) de la Ley 734 de 2002 y el articulo 49 (parcial) de la Ley 1952 de 2019, dentro del expediente D-13919.
  2. Segundo. COMUNICAR al solicitante esta decision, por intermedio de la Secretaria General de esta corporacion.
  3. Tercero. 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.