JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 15, 2010

A- de 2010

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

Reporting justice Juan Carlos Henao Pérez

✓Claimant Ruben Dario Acosta Gonzalez·Respondent Sin Información

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.

Aclaracion Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Procedencia de oficio y a solicitud de parte respecto de conceptos o frases contenidas en la parte resolutiva o que influyan en ella
Fallo De Revision De Tutela
  • Reiteración improcedencia de aclaración, corrección o adición
Nombramiento De Notarios En Propiedad
  • Efectos inter comunis otorgados en sentencia SU913/09
Solicitud De Aclaración De Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Improcedencia frente a solicitud sobre compensación de curso de especialización para obtener título de abogado para concurso de notarios en sentencia SU913/09
4 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicita se aclare si a el Dr.

Eduardo Pacheco, se le revocó o no la tutela, mediante la cual se le otorgó puntaje por un curso de especialización que adelantó, la Corte considera que en este caso no se evidencia una razón objetiva duda ya que el fallo fue muy claro respecto de este punto.

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. RESUELVE:
  2. DENEGAR la solicitud de aclaración de la Sentencia T-2210489 AC, presentada por el señor RUBEN DARIO ACOSTA GONZÁLEZ.
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.

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.