JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 25, 2012

A- de 2012

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 Ricardo Alvarez Cubillos Y Otra

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.

Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de Súplica interpuesto contra el auto del 19 de abril de 2012, dictado por el Magistrado Juan Carlos Henao Pérez, mediante el cual se rechazó el proceso de la referencia, bajo la consideración del silencio de los accionantes frente al auto de inadmisión.

La Corte encuentra que el recurso de súplica es improcedente, pues por ésta vía no se puede pretender enmendar la inactividad de los demandantes y revivir la oportunidad procesal que perdieron, al obviar la carga procesal de corregir los errores que oportunamente le fueron advertidos.

Se decide confirmar el auto recurrido.

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. CONFIRMAR el Auto del 19 de abril de 2012 dictado por el Magistrado Sustanciador, Juan Carlos Henao Perez, por medio del cual rechazo la demanda de inconstitucionalidad, identificada con el numero de radicacion D-8999, por las consideraciones expuestas en la presente providencia.
  2. SEGUNDO. A traves de la Secretaria General de la Corte, comuniquese el contenido de esta decision al recurrente, indicandole que contra esta no procede recurso alguno.
  3. La Secretaria General de esta Corporacion comunicara el contenido de esta providencia a los actores, a traves del medio mas idoneo para ello.
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.