JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 27, 1999

A- de 1999

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Leopoldo De Avila Frias

✓
Topic · hard data
Solicitud De Nulidad Sentencia T-523/99.
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.

Medio De Defensa Judicial
  • Normatividad legal aplicable para reconocimiento de pensión
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se denegó la solicitud formulada por el ciudadano de la referencia para que se declare la nulidad de la Sentencia T-523/99, proferida por la Sala Segunda de Revisión, toda vez que las sentencias que profiera la Corte Constitucional en desarrollo de sus atribuciones tienen carácter definitivo, en cuanto resuelven de manera inapelable los asuntos que ante ella se plantean, bien se trata de procesos de constitucionalidad en estricto sentido (control abstracto), ya que aludan a la revisión de los fallos de instancia en materia de protección a los derechos constitucionales fundamentales.

Contra la presente providencia no procede recurso alguno.

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. DENEGAR la solicitud formulada por el senor Leopoldo de Avila Frias para que se declare la nulidad de la sentencia T-523 de julio 22 de 1999, proferida por la Sala Segunda de Revision.
  2. Contra la presente providencia no procede 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.

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.