JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 22, 2017

A- de 2017

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

Reporting justice Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado

✓Claimant Ministerio De Relaciones Exteriores

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)

Solicitud de nulidad de la Sentencia SU.443/16.

La Jefe de la Oficina Asesora Jurídica Interna del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores propuso como causal de nulidad la falta de integración del litisconsorcio pasivo necesario.

Específicamente argumentó, que en el trámite de la acción de tutela se debió vincular al Senado de la República, en tanto ese órgano de la Rama Legislativa fue el que mediante la Ley 6ª de 1972, aprobó la Convención de Viena sobre Relaciones Diplomáticas.

Luego de comprobar que la memorialista no tiene legitimación para invocar la causal de nulidad respecto del Senado de la República se decidió RECHAZAR la petición formulada.

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. RECHAZAR la solicitud de nulidad formulada por el Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores contra la Sentencia SU-443 de 2016, proferida por la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional.
  2. SEGUNDO. Comuniquese la presente providencia al Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores, con la advertencia que contra esta decision no procede ningun recurso.
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.