JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 15, 2002

A- de 2002

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 Herminio Pedroza Ballesteros Y Otros

✓
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.

Derechos Fundamentales
  • Vulneración radica en la aplicación de acto administrativo
Acción De Tutela
  • Competencia de acuerdo a la naturaleza de la entidad
4 topics · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se ordenó remitir el expediente de tutela al Tribunal Superior de Cali, Sala Civil, para que adelante la correspondiente actuación judicial, toda vez que los accionantes escogieron a prevención para la interposición de su tutela el municipio de Cali y concretamente un juez civil municipal.

Respetando los criterios de lugar y especialidad fijados a prevención por los peticionarios (Art. 37 del Decreto 2591 de 1991), y a su vez aplicando las disposiciones del Decreto 1382, Art. 1º, numeral 1º, inciso 2º, se hace necesario enviar el caso de autos al citado Tribunal por ser el superior funcional del Juzgado 7º Civil Municipal de Cali que en términos del Decreto 1382 de 2000, tiene competencia para conocer de este asunto.

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. REMITIR el expediente de tutela al Tribunal Superior de Cali, Sala Civil, para que adelante la correspondiente actuacion judicial.
  2. Comuniquese,
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.

Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

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