JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 14, 2001

A- de 2001

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

Reporting justice Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa

✓Claimant Gustavo Adolfo Higuita Olaya

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia
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.

2 topics · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se inaplicó el Art. 1º del Decreto 1382 de 2000 en el presente caso, por ser manifiestamente contrario a la Constitución Política.

En consecuencia, se dirime el conflicto de competencia suscitado entre el Tribunal Administrativo de Antioquia y el Juzgado Sexto Civil del Circuito de Medellín, para conocer de la acción de tutela promovida por el ciudadano de la referencia contra la Caja de Retiro de las Fuerzas Militares, en el sentido de que su conocimiento corresponde al primero de los citados despachos judiciales.

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.

See the operative part (6 points)
  1. Primero. Inaplicar, en el presente caso, por ser manifiestamente contrario a la Constitucion Politica, el articulo 1o del Decreto 1382 de 2000.
  2. Segundo. Dirimir el conflicto de competencia suscitado entre el Tribunal Administrativo de Antioquia y el Juzgado
  3. Sexto. Civil del Circuito de Medellin, para conocer de la accion de tutela promovida Gustavo Adolfo Higuita Olaya contra la Caja de Retiro de las Fuerzas Militares, en el sentido de que su conocimiento corresponde al
  4. primero. de los citados despachos judiciales.
  5. Tercero. Remitir el expediente al Tribunal Contencioso Administrativo de Antioquia para lo de su competencia y comunicar lo aqui decidido al Juzgado
  6. Sexto. Civil del Circuito de Medellin, para los fines legales pertinentes.
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.