JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 11, 2023

A- de 2023

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

Reporting justice Jorge Enrique Ibáñez Najar

✓Claimant Cecc

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 Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Presupuestos formales y materiales de procedencia
  • Negar por falta de carga argumentativa
Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Inexistencia de violaciones al debido proceso
2 topics · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de nulidad del proceso que culminó con la adopción de la Sentencia T-172/23.

El peticionario, en calidad de vinculado dentro de la acción de tutela de la referencia, adujo que sus derechos fundamentales al debido proceso y a la defensa fueron vulnerados con el fallo precitado.

La Sala Plena de la Corporación concluyó que el escrito que se presentó no satisfizo la carga argumentativa exigida para analizar materialmente la nulidad invocada y, por ello, decidió RECHAZARLA.

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 falta de carga argumentativa, la solicitud de nulidad formulada por el señor CECC en contra de la Sentencia T-172 de 2023.
  2. Segundo. COMUNICAR, a través de la Secretaría General de la Corte, el contenido de esta decisión al señor CECC, y a las partes, indicando que contra esta 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.