JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 2, 2000

A- de 2000

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

Reporting justice Martha Victoria Sáchica Méndez

✓Claimant Jose Bechara Andrade

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia
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.

Presidente De La Republica
  • Exceso en la potestad reglamentaria
  • Incompetencia para introducir modificaciones al decreto de tutela en materia de competencias
4 topics · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se ordenó inaplicar el Art. 1 del Decreto 1382 de 2000 por ser manifiestamente contrario a la Constitución Política.

Se dirimió el conflicto de competencia suscitado entre el Tribunal Administrativo de Antioquia y el Juzgado Octavo Civil del Circuito de Medellín, para conocer de la acción de tutela promovida por el ciudadano de la referencia contra el Seguro Social (E.P.S.), en el sentido de que su conocimiento corresponde al primero de los citados despachos judiciales.

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.

See the operative part (6 points)
  1. Primero. Inaplicar, en el presente caso, por ser manifiestamente contrario a la Constitucion Politica, el articulo 1 del Decreto 1382 de 2000.
  2. Segundo. Dirimir el conflicto de competencia suscitado entre el Tribunal Administrativo de Antioquia y el Juzgado
  3. Octavo. Civil del Circuito de Medellin, para conocer de la accion de tutela promovida por Armando Jose Bechara Andrade contra el Seguro Social (E.P.S.), en el sentido de que su conocimiento corresponde al
  4. primero. de los citados despachos judiciales.
  5. Tercero. Remitir el expediente al Tribunal Administrativo de Antioquia y comunicar lo aqui decidido al Juzgado
  6. Octavo. Civil del Circuito de Medellin, para los fines legales pertinentes.
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.