JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)June 11, 2014

A- de 2014

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

Reporting justice Nilson Elías Pinilla Pinilla

✓Claimant Augusto Alfonso Peña Cruz

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
  • Procedencia respecto de conceptos o frases contenidas en la parte resolutiva o que influyan en ella
  • Reiteración de improcedencia
  • Procedencia por presentación dentro del término de ejecutoria
3 topics · 5 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-950/10.

El peticionario solicita a la Sala aclarar la sentencia de la referencia, en el sentido de indicarle la fecha a partir de la cual se le debe reconocer la pensión de sobrevivientes concedida en ella.

La Sala encuentra que la aclaración solicitada no procede, porque el contenido del fallo, tanto en su parte motiva como resolutiva, no denota falta de claridad alguna.

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. NO ACCEDER a la solicitud de aclaracion de la sentencia T-950 proferida por la Sala Sexta de Revision en noviembre 25 de 2010.
  2. Segundo. INFORMAR al interesado que contra el presente auto 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.