JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)March 11, 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 Catalina Tapias Pedraza Y Otros

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.

Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Rechazo cuando recae sobre normas amparadas en sentencias que hicieron tránsito a cosa juzgada
  • Razones claras, ciertas, específicas, pertinentes y suficientes
Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad Frente A Ley Que Implementa Certificado De Aptitud Psicofisica Para Porte Y Tenencia De Armas De Fuego
  • Rechazar recurso de súplica por existir cosa juzgada mediante sentencia C-460/13
  • Recurso de súplica
3 topics · 5 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de Súplica contra el auto del 12 de diciembre de 2013, mediante el cual se resolvió rechazar el primer cargo de la demanda en relación con el derecho a la igualdad, en tanto se configuraba el fenómeno de la cosa juzgada constitucional, por cuanto la Corporación ya había resuelto el problema jurídico mediante sentencia C-460/13.

La Sala Plena decide CONFIRMAR el inciso primero del auto recurrido.

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. Primero. CONFIRMAR el inciso
  2. primero. del auto del doce (12) de diciembre de dos mil trece (2013), por medio del cual se rechazo el primer cargo de la demanda No. D-10025.
  3. Segundo. Contra esta providencia no cabe recurso alguno.
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.