JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 1, 2017

A- de 2017

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

Reporting justice María Victoria Calle Correa

✓Claimant Seguros Generales Suramericana S.A. Y Otro·Respondent Sociedad De Activos Especiales Y Otra

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
  • Negar por cuanto no se cumplió con el requisito formal de la debida argumentación
1 topic · 1 subtopic · 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 SU.556/16- Las compañías de Seguros Generales Suramericana S.A. y Allianz Seguros S.A solicitaron a la Corporación, de forma principal, anular la providencia de la referencia o, de manera subsidiaria, anular los numerales tercero y cuarto de su parte resolutiva.

Para fundamentar la petición argumentaron siete cargos, entre los cuales se destacan, el desconocimiento de la jurisprudencia en vigor, la incongruencia del fallo y la falta de consideración de un asunto constitucional trascendental.

Tras concluir que las compañías peticionarais no cumplieron la carga argumentativa de los cuestionamientos planteados, la Sala Plena decidió NEGAR la solicitud invocada.

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. en nombre del pueblo y por mandato de la Constitución,
  2. RESUELVE
  3. NEGAR la solicitud de nulidad de la sentencia SU-556 de 2016.
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
DissentMaría Victoria Calle CorreaDissentAlejandro Linares Cantillo
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.

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.