A- de 2016
The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.
Reporting justice Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo
✓Claimant Javier Pineda Solisi
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.
- Rechazar por improcedente
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)
Solicitud de aclaración de la sentencia T-051/16.
El peticionario argumentó que en la precitada providencia se utilizan indistintamente las expresiones “enviar” la notificación y “notificación” del comparendo, en lo relacionado con las infracciones de tránsito captadas por medios electrónicos.
Luego de analizar la solicitud formulada, la Sala decide RECHAZARLA.
What it decided
Operative part (Resuelve)
✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.
- PRIMERO. De acuerdo con las consideraciones expuestas, RECHAZAR la solicitud de aclaracion de la Sentencia T-051 de 2016, formulada por el ciudadano Javier Pineda Solis.
- SEGUNDO. COMUNICAR la presente providencia al peticionario, con la advertencia que contra esta decision no procede ningun recurso.
- Notifiquese, comuniquese,
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.
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 indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.