JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 9, 1996

A- de 1996

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

Reporting justice Antonio Barrera Carbonell

✓Claimant Carmona Carvajal Rafael Antonio·Respondent I.S.S. Seccional Antioquia

✓
Topic · hard data
Nulidad Por Sentencia Inhibitoria En Tutela.
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 · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se decretó la nulidad de lo actuado en el proceso de tutela de la referencia, la Corte recordó que el derecho de petición exige respuesta pronta, sustancial y de obligatorio cumplimiento, no sustituible por el acto ficto derivado del silencio administrativo negativo.

En consecuencia, se ordena devolver el expediente al Tribunal respectivo para que se pronuncie sobre la cuestión de fondo planteada en la demanda; luego de determinar si hubo o no violación del derecho invocado.

El fallo proferido, se enviará a esta Corte, para su eventual revisión.

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. administrando justicia en nombre del pueblo y por autoridad de la Constitución, RESUELVE:
  2. DECRETAR la nulidad de lo actuado en el proceso de tutela radicado bajo el número T-101.102, a partir del auto de mayo 3 de 1996. En consecuencia, se ordena devolver el expediente a la Sala Laboral del Tribunal Superior de Medellín, para que se pronuncie sobre la cuestión de fondo planteada en la demanda; luego de determinar si hubo o no violación del derecho invocado. El fallo proferido, se enviará a esta Corte, para su eventual revisión.
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.