JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 17, 2009

A- de 2009

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

Reporting justice Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto

✓Claimant Jorge Enrique Cifuentes Lancheros Vs Fundacion San Juan De Dios

✓
Topic · hard data
Solicitud De Cumplimiento De La Sentencia T-195 De 2004. Dentro Del Trámite De La Solicitud, Fue Resuelta La Petición Del Accionante Por Lo Tanto Se Decide Rechazar La Solicitud Presentada.
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.

Cumplimiento Fallo De Tutela
  • Corresponde al juez de primera instancia
Corte Constitucional
  • Condiciones para intervenir en cumplimiento de sus providencias
  • Conserva competencia preferente para intervenir en cumplimiento de sus providencias
Solicitud De Cumplimiento Fallo De Tutela
  • Rechazar por cuanto se ordeno al Hospital San Juan de Dios el pago de mesadas pensionales
3 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
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 (4 points)
  1. PRIMERO. RECHAZAR la solicitud presentada por el apoderado judicial del señor Jorge Enrique Cifuentes Lancheros.
  2. SEGUNDO. Por la Secretaría General de esta Corporación, REMITASE el expediente de la referencia a la Sala Jurisdiccional Disciplinaria del Consejo Seccional de la Judicatura.
  3. TERCERO. Por la Secretaría General de esta Corporación, NOTIFÍQUESE y ENVÍESE copia del presente Auto a la Fundación San Juan de Dios.
  4. CUARTO. contra esta 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
Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.

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