JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 8, 2018

A- de 2018

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

Reporting justice Carlos Libardo Bernal Pulido

✓Claimant Coopjardin S.A. Esp

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.

Corte Constitucional
  • Competencia excepcional para conocer solicitud de cumplimiento
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

El representante legal de Coopjardín S.A.

ESP presentó una solicitud a la Corporación, encaminada a que ésta asuma el trámite de cumplimiento de la Sentencia T-385/13.

La Corte decide NEGAR la petición formulada, tras advertir que existe la probabilidad de que la situación denunciada constituya un nuevo conflicto jurídico-contractual ajeno a la verificación de la orden de tutela.

Se le advierte al peticionario que si considera que subsisten aspectos en los que la decisión de la Corte está siendo incumplida, debe alegarlo y acreditarlo ante el juez de primera instancia, para que éste adopte la decisión que en derecho corresponda.

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 del representante legal de Coopjardin S.A. ESP encaminada a que la Corte Constitucional asuma el tramite de cumplimiento de la sentencia T-385 de 2013.
  2. Segundo. Por Secretaria General, COMUNICAR a las partes del proceso de tutela la decision adoptada en esta providencia.
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 available2
ConcurrenceCarlos Libardo Bernal PulidoConcurrenceDiana Constanza Fajardo Rivera
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.

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.