JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 15, 2003

A- de 2003

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

Reporting justice Clara Inés Vargas Hernández

✓Claimant Jose Vicente Cañas Cardona

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia. Consejo De Estado
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.

Consejo De Estado
  • Competencia para conocer de la impugnación contra una sentencia de tutela
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se decidió estarse a lo resuelto en el A. 134A/02 en relación al conflicto de competencia entre la Sección Segunda Subsección D del Tribunal Administrativo de Cundinamarca y la Sala Jurisdiccional Disciplinaria del Consejo Superior de la Judicatura en lo referente a la tutela promovida por el ciudadano de la referencia.

En consecuencia, el Consejo de Estado, Sala de lo Contencioso Administrativo, deberá ajustarse a lo previsto en el citada Auto, para tal fin, se remitió el expediente.

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. ESTARSE A LO RESUELTO en el Auto de 134A de 20 de agosto de 2002 en relacion al conflicto de competencia entre la Seccion Segunda Subseccion D del Tribunal Administrativo de Cundinamarca y la Sala Jurisdiccional Disciplinaria del Consejo Superior de la Judicatura en lo referente a la accion de tutela promovida por el ciudadano JOSE VICENTE CANAS CARDONA, conforme a lo expuesto en la parte motiva.
  2. SEGUNDO. En consecuencia, el Consejo de Estado, Sala de lo Contencioso Administrativo, debera ajustarse a lo previsto en el Auto 134A de 20 de agosto de 2002, de acuerdo a lo expuesto en esta providencia. Para tal fin, remitase el expediente.
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.

Separate opinions — text available1
DissentJaime Araujo Rentería
Official text from the case-law reporter · the most valuable part of the ruling: the positions that did not carry the majority.
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.