JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 22, 2005

A- de 2005

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Maria Astrid Ospina De Mercado Vs. Ministerio De Hacienda Y Otros

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia Entre El Tribunal Administrativo De Cundinamarca Seccion Segunda, Subseccion C Y El Juzgado Tercero Del Circuito De Bogota. Ordena Remitir El Expediente Al Tribunal Administrativo De Cundinamarca Seccion Segunda, Subseccion C
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.

Accion De Tutela Contra Autoridad Publica Del Orden Nacional
  • Competencia del Tribunal Superior, Administrativo y Consejo Seccional de la Judicatura
Accion De Tutela Contra Autoridades De Diferente Nivel
  • Competencia del juez de mayor jerarquía
Accion De Tutela Contra Beneficencia De Cundinamarca
  • Competencia del Tribunal Administrativo de Cundinamarca
4 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. En merito de lo expuesto, la Corte Constitucional, en Sala Plena,
  2. RESUELVE:
  3. Remitase el expediente contentivo de la accion de tutela promovida por la ciudadana Maria Astrid Ospina de Mercado, al Tribunal Administrativo de Cundinamarca, Seccion 2a, Subseccion C para que la tramite y decida sin mas dilacion.
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.