JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)May 16, 2024

A- de 2024

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

Reporting justice Paola Andrea Meneses Mosquera

✓Claimant Bertha Cecilia Medina Castro·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.

Solicitud De Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Requisitos formales y materiales de procedencia
  • Rechazar por extemporánea
2 topics · 3 subtopics · 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-024/24.

El argumento de los nulicitantes fue que la precitada providencia vulneró los artículos 13, 29, 84 y 230 de la Constitución.

En términos generales, reiteraron los argumentos planteados en la demanda de tutela.

Luego de constatar que el incidente fue presentado de manera extemporánea, la Sala Plena de la Corporación decidió RECHAZARLO por incumplir con el requisito de oportunidad.

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. RECHAZAR la solicitud de nulidad presentada por la señora Bertha Cecilia Medina Castro y otros, a través de apoderado judicial, contra la Sentencia T-024 de 2024.
  2. SEGUNDO. Por intermedio de la Secretaría General de la Corte Constitucional, COMUNICAR la presente decisión a las partes, con la advertencia de que contra esta providencia 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 available2
ConcurrenceDiana Constanza Fajardo RiveraDissentJosé Fernando Reyes Cuartas
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

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