JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 23, 2015

A- de 2015

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

Reporting justice Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado

✓Claimant Fiscalia General De La Nacion

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 Aclaración Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Procedencia excepcional
  • Rechazar por extemporánea
1 topic · 2 subtopics · 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 T-203/15.

La Directora Jurídica de la Fiscalía General de la Nación pidió a la Sala aclarar la providencia de la referencia, en la medida que la Corte no consignó lo relativo a la indemnización en la parte resolutiva del fallo, aun cuando dicho presupuesto necesariamente debía constar como una orden, al advertir que el acto administrativo que retiró a la actora no fue motivado, tal como lo expuso en las consideraciones.

La Sala considera que la presente petición no se presentó de manera oportuno y por ello, decidió RECHAZARLA.

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. De acuerdo con las consideraciones expuestas, RECHAZAR la solicitud de aclaracion de la Sentencia T-203 de 2015, formulada por la Fiscalia General de la Nacion.
  2. SEGUNDO. COMUNICAR la presente providencia al solicitante, con la advertencia que contra esta decision no procede ningun recurso.
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.

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.