JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 26, 1994

A- de 1994

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

Reporting justice Jorge Arango Mejía

✓Claimant Tibamoso Maria Dolores

✓
Topic · hard data
No Sustentacion De La Impugnacion. Informalidad De La Tutela.
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.

Impugnación Fallo De Tutela
  • No requiere sustentación
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se ordenó remitir el expediente de tutela de la referencia al Juzgado Sexto Penal del Circuito de Tunja, para que resuelva la impugnación presentada por la actora y luego de resuelto el recurso devolverlo a la Corte Constitucional para su eventual revisión.

La Corporación aclaró que en el presente caso no se surtió la segunda instancia solicitada por la demandante, por no existir sustentación del recurso, para lo cual, no es indispensable tal requisito, para que proceda la impugnación.

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. Por la Secretaría General de la Corte, REMITASE el expediente de tutela número T-39.355 al Juzgado
  2. Sexto. Penal del Circuito de Tunja, para que resuelva la impugnación presentada por la señora María Dolores Tibamoso.
  3. SEGUNDO. Resuelto el recurso, DEVUELVASE el presente expediente a la Corte Constitucional para su eventual revisión, tal como lo ordenan los artículos 86 de la Constitución y 32, inciso segundo, del decreto 2591 de 1991.
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.