JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 11, 2003

A- de 2003

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

Reporting justice Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa

✓Claimant Hospital Integrado San Juan De Dios

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia.
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.

Conflicto De Competencia En Tutela
  • Despachos de igual jerarquía pero no de igual especialidad
  • Competencia a prevención y libertad para escoger la especialidad del juez competente
1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se remitió el expediente de la referencia al Tribunal Administrativo de Santander, para que ejerciendo sus competencias constitucionales y legales, decida sobre la acción de tutela del Hospital Integrado San Juan de Dios contra el Ministerio de Protección Social, lo anterior, por ser la autoridad judicial escogida por la actora de conformidad con los Arts. 86 y 37 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.

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. En merito de lo expuesto, la Sala Plena de la Corte Constitucional
  2. RESUELVE
  3. Remitir, por intermedio de Secretaria General, el expediente de la referencia al Tribunal Administrativo de Santander, para que, ejerciendo sus competencias constitucionales y legales, decida sobre la accion de tutela del Hospital Integrado San Juan de Dios contra el Ministerio de Proteccion Social.
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
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

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