JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 15, 1992

A- de 1992

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

Reporting justice Alejandro Martínez Caballero

✓Claimant Alfonso Diaz Oyaga

✓
Topic · hard data
Procedimiento De La Accion De Tutela. Competencia De 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.

4 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se abstuvo de dictar sentencia de revisión a la tutela referida, al considerar que no existe hasta el momento pronunciamiento judicial ni de primera ni de segunda instancia.

En consecuencia, la Corte Constitucional se encuentra ante una ausencia de objeto y no puede pronunciarse.

En tal sentido, remite el expediente No.

T-1486 a la Corte Suprema de Justicia para que lo envíe al Tribunal Superior de Santafé de Bogotá, de manera que éste último conozca sobre la acción de tutela.

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.

See the operative part (4 points)
  1. R E S U E L VE .
  2. Primero. ABSTENERSE de dictar sentencia de Revisión por los motivos expuestos en este auto.
  3. Segundo. REMITIR el expediente a la Corte Suprema de Justicia para que envíe al Tribunal Superior de Santafé de Bogotá, el negocio identificado con el número T-1486 y le ordene conocer de esta acción de tutela.
  4. Tercero. La Corte Suprema de Justicia comunicará al peticionario la decisión tomada 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.

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
Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.

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