JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 27, 2016

A- de 2016

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

Reporting justice Alejandro Linares Cantillo

✓Claimant Pedro

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.

Solicitud De Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Rechazar por no invocarse ninguna de las causales de nulidad
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 nulidad de la Sentencia T-688/15.

El accionante invocó como causales de nulidad defecto probatorio, emisión de órdenes a particulares que no fueron vinculados al proceso, incongruencia entre la parte motiva y resolutiva de la sentencia, eludir resolver asuntos de relevancia constitucional y. desconocimiento del criterio de interpretación o la posición jurisprudencial fijada por la Sala Plena de la Corporación.

Al no encontrar probada ninguna de las causales invocadas y, por el contrario, reafirmar que la mera inconformidad del peticionario con el sentido del fallo, sus fundamentos teóricos, probatorios o procesales, su redacción o estilo argumentativo no resultan motivos suficientes para decretar la nulidad del fallo, se decide NEGAR la petición formulada.

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. NEGAR la solicitud de nulidad de la sentencia T-688 de 2015, formulada por el señor Daniel Andrés Correa Posada.
  2. SEGUNDO. Contra este pronunciamiento 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.

Separate opinions — text available1
ConcurrenceGloria Stella Ortiz Delgado
Official text from the case-law reporter · the most valuable part of the ruling: the positions that did not carry the majority.
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.