JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 26, 2014

A- de 2014

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

Reporting justice Mauricio González Cuervo

✓Claimant Falconerys Caro Rosado

✓
Topic · hard data
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 existió vulneración del debido proceso y se pretende reabrir debate jurídico
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 C-853-13.

Considera la incidentante que la Corte, al declarar la exequibilidad de la norma demandada, incurrió en unas irregularidades que condujeron a la violación del debido proceso por inaplicación de los principios de no regresividad y progresividad en materia pensional y, por desconocer el precedente jurisprudencial sobre la protección constitucional de las expectativas legítimas en dicha materia.

Se reitera que la solicitud de nulidad no es un recurso de reconsideración ni una nueva instancia procesal para que la Sala Plena reformule las razones que dieron lugar a la providencia atacada y, menos aún, para presentar nuevos cargos de inconstitucionalidad tendientes a reabrir el debate jurídico que finalizó con dicha decisión.

SE DENIEGA.

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 nulidad de la sentencia C-853 de 2013, presentada por la ciudadana Falconerys Caro Rosado.
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 available3
DissentMauricio González CuervoDissentJorge Iván Palacio PalacioDissentMaría Victoria Calle Correa
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.

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.