JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)June 24, 2024

A- de 2024

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

Reporting justice Jorge Enrique Ibáñez Najar

✓Claimant Administradora Colombiana De Pensiones - Colpesiones- 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.

Solicitud De Aclaración Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Procedencia excepcional
  • Rechazar por extemporánea
1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitudes de aclaración de la Sentencia SU.107/24, formuladas por dos ciudadanas y por Colpensiones.

Luego de analizar cada uno de los escritos presentados, la Sala Plena de la Corporación decidió RECHAZAR lo pretendido en ellos, en dos casos por no cumplir con la exigencia de carga argumentativa y, en el otro, por no satisfacer el requisito de oportunidad.

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 las solicitudes de aclaración de la Sentencia SU-107 de 2024, presentadas por el apoderado de María Cecilia Gamboa Casabianca, por Colpensiones y por Leyla Esperanza Escobar Vásquez, todos accionantes en el proceso de la referencia, por las razones expuestas en la parte motiva de esta providencia.
  2. SEGUNDO. Por intermedio de la Secretaría General, COMUNICAR el contenido de esta decisión a los solicitantes y advertir que contra ella 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.