JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)February 1, 2024

A- de 2024

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

Reporting justice Paola Andrea Meneses Mosquera

✓Claimant Prodeco S.A.

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.

Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Carga argumentativa de quien la invoca
  • No constituye oportunidad para reabrir debates jurídicos resueltos
3 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Con el presente auto se rechazan las solicitudes de nulidad, aclaración y adición formuladas, de manera separada, C.I.

Prodeco S.A., Drummond Ltda y la ANLA, contra la Sentencia T-375/23, principalmente por no satisfacer la carga argumentativa necesaria para este tipo de peticiones.

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.

See the operative part (4 points)
  1. Primero. RECHAZAR las solicitudes de nulidad parciales presentadas, de manera separada, por C.I. Prodeco S.A. y Drummond Ltda., a través de sus apoderados judiciales, contra la Sentencia T-375 de 2023 en vista de la inobservancia de la carga argumentativa y, en particular, de la falta de legitimación de Drummond Ltda. para formular el
  2. quinto. de sus reparos.
  3. Segundo. RECHAZAR las solicitudes de aclaración y adición presentadas, de manera separada, en forma subsidiaria, por C.I. Prodeco S.A., Drummond Ltda. y, de manera principal, por la ANLA contra la Sentencia T-375 de 2023, al no satisfacer la carga argumentativa correspondiente.
  4. Tercero. COMUNICAR, por intermedio de la Secretaría General de la Corte Constitucional, la presente decisión a las partes, con la advertencia de que contra esta providencia 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.