JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 18, 2007

A- de 2007

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

Reporting justice Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra

✓Claimant Jose Saul Peña Garcia Vs. Iss

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia Entre El Juzgado Octavo Administrativo De Tunja, Juzgado De Ejecucion De Penas Y Medidas De Seguridad De Santa Rosa De Viterbo, Juzgado Unico Administrativo Del Distrito Judicial De Santa Rosa De Viterbo Y Juzgado Segundo Penal Del Circuito De Sogamoso. Ordena Remitir El Expediente Al Juzgado Unico Administrativo Del Distrito Judicial De Santa Rosa De Viterbo
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.

Acción De Tutela
  • Competencia a prevención y libertad del actor para escoger el juez competente
  • Criterios para establecer la competencia del juez del lugar donde ocurrió la vulneración o amenaza de los derechos fundamentales
1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
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.

See the operative part (5 points)
  1. PRIMERO. REMITIR el expediente contentivo de la acción de tutela interpuesta por José Saul Peña García contra el Instituto de Seguros Sociales, al Juzgado Único Administrativo del Distrito Judicial de Santa Rosa de Viterbo, para que adelante la correspondiente actuación judicial.
  2. SEGUNDO. Por Secretaría General COMUNÍQUESE al Juzgado
  3. Octavo. Administrativo de Tunja, al Juzgado de Ejecución de Penas y Medidas de Seguridad de Santa Rosa de Viterbo y al Juzgado
  4. Segundo. Penal del Circuito de Sogamoso, la decisión adoptada en esta providencia, con el fin de que tengan conocimiento sobre lo aquí resuelto por la Corte Constitucional en relación con el conflicto de competencia.
  5. Comuníquese,
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.