JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)June 20, 2013

A- de 2013

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

Reporting justice Jorge Ignacio Pretelt Chaljub

✓Claimant Cesar Daza Camelo·Respondent Sin Información

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 De Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Procedencia excepcional del artículo 309 del Código de Procedimiento Civil
Aclaracion Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Declaración de inexequibilidad en sentencia C-113/93
  • Procedencia mediante auto complementario dentro del término de ejecutoria, de oficio o a solicitud de parte respecto de conceptos o frases contenidas en la parte resolutiva o que influyan en ella
3 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de aclaración de la sentencia T-092/13.

Específicamente solicita el memorialista que se aclare qué factores salariales deben ser incluidos al momento de cumplir la orden de indexar la primera mesada pensional de los accionantes.

La Sala decide DENEGAR la solicitud de aclaración impetrada, por no encontrarse dentro de las causales establecidas por la jurisprudencia constitucional para que dicha petición proceda.

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. DENEGAR, de acuerdo con las consideraciones expuestas, la solicitud de aclaracion de la Sentencia T-092 de 2013, formulada por el doctor Cesar Augusto Daza.
  2. SEGUNDO. COMUNICAR la presente providencia la peticionario, 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.

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.