JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 28, 1999

A- de 1999

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

Reporting justice José Gregorio Hernández Galindo

✓Claimant Mariela Paula Rivera Y Otras

✓
Topic · hard data
Solicitud De Nulidad De La Sentencia T-321/99.
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.

Nulidad Sentencia De Revision De Tutela
  • Alcance del cambio de jurisprudencia
  • Fundada en vulneración ostensible del debido proceso
  • Carácter excepcional
Nulidad Sentencia De Revision En Tutela
  • La sola diferencia con lo resuelto en casos similares no implica la configuración
Reintegro Al Cargo
  • Orden del juez constitucional de restablecer derechos fundamentales
4 topics · 6 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se negó por improcedente la nulidad solicitada, toda vez que no hay cambio alguno en la línea jurisprudencial de la Corporación, pues lo que se ha negado en casos como los que menciona el solicitante es el reintegro susceptible de ser tramitado por los procedimientos adecuados ante los jueces ordinarios, no el que restablece exclusivamente derechos fundamentales, como en los casos vistos.

Contra esta decisión no procede recurso alguno.

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. NEGAR, por improcedente, la nulidad solicitada.
  2. Segundo. Contra esta decision no procede recurso alguno.
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.