A- de 2016
The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.
Reporting justice Alberto Rojas Ríos
✓Claimant William Lopez Tovar
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.
- Se confirma en su integridad el auto recurrido
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)
Recurso de súplica formulado en contra del auto que rechazó la demanda de la referencia, con base en lo dispuesto en el artículo 6º, inciso 2 del Decreto 2067 de 1991.
La Sala Plena considera que el recurso impetrado no está llamado a prosperar, porque los argumentos planteados en él solo están dirigidos a oponerse a las razones que sustentaron el auto de inadmisión y no, contra el fundamento que llevó al magistrado sustanciador a rechazar la demanda.
En virtud de lo anterior, se CONFIRMA el auto recurrido.
What it decided
Operative part (Resuelve)
✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.
- PRIMERO. CONFIRMAR el Auto del veinte (20) noviembre de dos mil quince (2015), mediante el cual se rechazo la demanda formulada por el ciudadano William Lopez Tovar, contra los articulos 5, 5.1, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.11, 5.13, 5.14, 5.15, 5.16, 6.23, 6.2.11, 7.2, 7.3, 7.4, 15.4, 21, 23, 24, 27, 34, 37, 38, 40 y 111.2 de la Ley 715 de 2001, el articulo 30 de la Ley 1176 de 2007 y la Ley 1294 de 2009.
- SEGUNDO. Contra la presente providencia no procede recurso alguno.
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.
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 indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.