JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)April 24, 2018

A- de 2018

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

Reporting justice José Fernando Reyes Cuartas

✓Claimant Ministerio De Tecnologias De La Informacion Y Las Comunicaciones Y Otro

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.

1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Con el presente auto se dispone NO ACCEDER a las solicitudes de audiencia pública presentadas por el Ministro de Tecnologías de la Información y las Comunicaciones, al igual que por el apoderado de Google LLC y Google Colombia LTDA.

Lo anterior, en consideración a que en el expediente obran los pronunciamientos de los peticionarios, al igual que varias intervenciones ciudadanas y amicus curiae de diversas organizaciones del ámbito nacional e internacional, con los cuales se cuenta con suficiente ilustración para decidir respecto al estudio de la petición de nulidad de la Sentencia T-063A/17.

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. NO ACCEDER a las solicitudes de audiencia publica presentadas por el Ministro de Tecnologias de la Informacion y las Comunicaciones y el apoderado de Google LLC y Google Colombia Ltda., por lo expuesto en la parte motiva de esta providencia.
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.