JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)December 13, 2016

A- de 2016

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 Silvestres Martinez Mesa Y Otros

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.

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 interpuesto en contra del auto que rechazó la demanda de la referencia, por cuanto el término de ejecutoria de la providencia de inadmisión venció en silencio, sin que ninguno de los demandantes presentara escrito de subsanación.

La Sala Plena de la Corporación decidió RECHAZAR el recurso formulado, por extemporáneo.

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.

See the operative part (2 points)
  1. Primero. RECHAZAR por extemporaneo el recurso de suplica presentado el 16 de noviembre de 2016 por el ciudadano Silvestre Martinez Mesa (D-11691) contra el Auto del 21 de octubre de 2016, mediante el cual se rechazaron las demandas presentadas por Silvestre Martinez Mesa (D-11691), Yaneth Barahona Olaya (D-11694), Antonio Jose Marin Aristizabal (D-11696) y Rubiela Barahona Olaya (D-11699) acumuladas, contra los articulos 3 (parcial) y 75 (parcial) de la Ley 1448 de 2011.
  2. Segundo. COMUNIQUESE la presente providencia al peticionario Silvestre Martinez Mesa (D-11691), informandole que contra ella 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.