JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)May 27, 2015

A- de 2015

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

Reporting justice Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado

✓Claimant Ruben Dario Campo Charris Y Otros·Respondent Sin Información

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.

Solicitud De Adicion Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Negar por cuanto peticionario no logró demostrar que se hubiera omitido resolver alguno de los extremos de la litis, o cualquier otro punto que debía ser objeto de pronunciamiento
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

En memoriales presentados de manera independiente, se pidió a la Corte Constitucional adicionar las órdenes contenidas en la sentencia T-345/14.

Luego de analizar cada una de las solicitudes entabladas, la Sala de Revisión decidió rechazar una por extemporánea y negar la otra.

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. RECHAZAR por extemporanea la solicitud de adicion de la Sentencia T-345 de 2014, formulada por el senor Rafael Antonio Velez Fernandez.
  2. SEGUNDO. De acuerdo con las consideraciones expuestas, NEGAR la solicitud de adicion de la Sentencia T-345 de 2014, formulada por el senor Ruben Dario Campo Charris.
  3. TERCERO. COMUNICAR la presente providencia a los peticionarios, con la advertencia que contra esta decision no procede ningun recurso.
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

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