JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 22, 2011

A- de 2011

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

Reporting justice Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto

✓Claimant Federico Arellano Mendoza Y Otros

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.

Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de Súplica contra el auto del 7 de septiembre de 2011 del Magistrado Jorge Ignacio Pretelt Chaljub, mediante el cual se rechazó la demanda de la referencia, por considerarse que no se verificaba una corrección de la misma, en el sentido exigido en el auto de inadmisión.

Luego de analizar el caso y determinar si los cargos planteados por el actor llenan las exigencias de suficiencia, pertinencia y especificidad, La Sala decide CONFIRMAR el auto recurrido.

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 en ejercicio de sus competencias,
  2. RESUELVE:
  3. Primero. CONFIRMAR el auto de siete (07) de septiembre de 2011, por el cual se rechazo la demanda presentada por los ciudadanos Federico Arellano Mendoza, Edgar Javier Pulido Caro y Luis Alfonso Arellano Becerra, contra el titulo y el articulo 3 parcial, de la Ley 1448 de 2011.
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.