JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 15, 2006

A- de 2006

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

Reporting justice Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto

✓Claimant Armando Rodriguez Lozano

✓
Topic · hard data
Recurso De Suplica Contra El Auto Del Doce (12) De Enero De 2006 Mediante El Cual Se Rechazo La Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad Contra El Articulo 3 Parcial De La Ley 923 De 2004. Confirma El Auto De Rechazo De La Demanda
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.

1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
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 merito de lo expuesto la sala Plena de la Corporacion en ejercicio de sus competencias
  2. RESUELVE:
  3. PRIMERO. CONFIRMAR el auto del doce (12) de enero de 2006, por el cual se rechazo la demanda presentada por el ciudadano Armando Rodriguez Lozano contra el articulo 3o (parcial) de la Ley 923 de 2004.
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.