JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)May 17, 2000

A- de 2000

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

Reporting justice Fabio Morón Díaz

✓Claimant Robinson Rendon Londoño

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencias.
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.

Conflicto De Competencia De Tutela
  • Jueces de una misma jurisdicción y distintos distritos judiciales
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se remitió el expediente de la referencia a la Corte Suprema de Justicia, para que dirima el conflicto de competencia y decida cuál de los dos juzgados debe conocer y tramitar la tutela impetrada por el accionante de la referencia contra las directivas de la Fundación Hospital San José de Sevilla, la Secretaría de Salud Departamental del Valle del Cauca-Gobernación del Valle y la Nación-Ministerio de Salud.

Lo anterior, porque la citada Corporación es su superior jerárquico común.

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. R E S U E L V E:
  2. REMITIR el expediente de la referencia a la H. Corte Suprema de Justicia, para que dicha Corporación dirima el conflicto de competencia y decida cuál de los dos juzgados debe conocer y tramitar la acción de tutela impetrada por ROBINSON RENDON LONDOÑO, contra las directivas de la Fundación Hospital San José de Sevilla, la Secretaría de Salud Departamental del Valle del Cauca-Gobernación del Valle y la Nación-Ministerio de Salud.
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.

Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.