JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)April 11, 2024

A- de 2024

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

Reporting justice Natalia Ángel Cabo

✓Claimant Vladimir Fernandez Andrade·Respondent --

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.

Impedimento De Magistrado
  • Aceptar por cuanto se encuentra fundado, por haber conceptuado sobre la constitucionalidad de la norma acusada
Impedimento Y Recusacion De Magistrado De La Corte Constitucional En Proceso De Constitucionalidad
  • Alcance de la causal "haber conceptuado sobre la constitucionalidad de la disposición acusada"
4 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Impedimento formulado por el magistrado Vladimir Fernández Andrade.

El profesional adujo estar incurso en las causales de impedimento definidas como: (i) haber intervenido en la expedición de la norma acusada y (ii) haber conceptuado sobre la constitucionalidad de dicha disposición.

Lo anterior, en ejercicio de sus funciones como secretario jurídico de la Presidencia de la República.

Luego de encontrar acreditadas las causales invocadas por el doctor Fernández Andrade, la Corte declaró FUNDADO el impedimento presentado para participar y decidir en el proceso de constitucionalidad de la referencia.

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. DECLARAR FUNDADO el impedimento manifestado por el magistrado Vladimir Fernández Andrade para participar y decidir el proceso de constitucionalidad tramitado bajo el expediente D-15438 AC.
  2. Segundo. Contra este auto 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.

The document’s networkthe most influential links · node size is how often the Court cites it
constitutional review unification tutela

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.