JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)August 20, 2008

A- de 2008

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

Reporting justice Jaime Córdoba Triviño

✓Claimant Ciro Antonio Rojas Agudelo Y Otro

✓
Topic · hard data
Recurso De Suplica Presentado Contra El Auto Del 16 De Julio De 2008, Proferido Por El Magistrado Manuel Jose Cepeda Espinosa, Que Rechazo Parcialmente La Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad Contra El Paragrafo 1º (Parcial) Del Articulo 5 De La Ley 797 De 2003. Falta De Concurrencia De Los Requisitos Para La Comprobacion De La Cosa Juzgada Aparente. La Decision Del Magistrado Sustanciador, En El Sentido De Considerar Que La Demanda En Contra De Uno De Los Apartados Acusados Debia Rechazarse En Razon De La Existencia De Cosa Juzgada Constitucional, Resulta Acertada, Sobre La Base De Que Los Planteamientos Expuestos Por Los Libelistas Para Concluir Que La Sentencia C-064 De 2005 Configuraba Cosa Juzgada Aparente, No Cumplen Con Las Condiciones Que La Jurisprudencia Constitucional Ha Previsto Para La Comprobacion De Ese Fenomeno. Confirmar El Auto Del 16 De Julio De 2008
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.

Cosa Juzgada Aparente
  • Existencia
  • Presupuestos para su existencia
  • Significado
Cosa Juzgada
  • Supuestos
2 topics · 4 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.

  1. RESUELVE:
  2. CONFIRMAR el Auto del 16 de julio de 2008, proferido por el Magistrado Manuel Jose Cepeda Espinosa, que rechazo parcialmente la demanda presentada por Ciro Antonio Rojas Agudelo y Orlando Neusa Forero contra el paragrafo 1o (parcial) del articulo 5o de la Ley 797/03.
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.

Appears in the rulingN1 · hard data
✓
Jaime Córdoba Triviño
Reporting justice
✓
Clara Ines Vargas Hernandez
Magistrado
✓
Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto
Presidente
✓
Jaime Araujo Rentería
Magistrado
✓
Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa
Magistrado
✓
Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra
Magistrado
✓
Mauricio González Cuervo
Magistrado
✓
Nilson Pinilla Pinilla
Magistrado
✓
Rodrigo Escobar Gil
Magistrado
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
← cites 0cited by 1 →A. 197/08C-315/09 — Fallo Inhibitorio Por Ineptitud De Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad Contra De La Ley 797 De 2003C-315/092009
constitutional review unification tutela
Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.
Cited by1

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.