JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)December 7, 2021

A- de 2021

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

Reporting justice José Fernando Reyes Cuartas

✓Claimant Rm

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.

2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de adición de la Sentencia SU.420/19.

La pretensión de la parte accionante es que la Corte ordena al accionado realizar una retractación en los términos reconocidos en las Sentencias T-787/04 y T-145/16, publicada por los mismos canales virtuales donde se efectuaron las manifestaciones vejatorias en su contra.

La Corte decidió RECHAZAR la petición de adición formulada en esta oportunidad, comoquiera que no comporta un extremo esencial de la litis que se hubiere omitido resolver, incumpliendo así los requisitos exigidos por el artículo 287 del Código General del Proceso y reiterados por la jurisprudencia constitucional.

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 peticion de adicion de la sentencia SU-420 de 2019 presentada por el senor RMM, conforme lo expuesto en la parte motiva de la presente providencia.
  2. Segundo. Proceda la Secretaria General a comunicar la presente decision adjuntando copia integral del presente proveido.
  3. Tercero. 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
Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.

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