JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)September 20, 2006

A- de 2006

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 Luis Agustin Castillo Zarate

✓
Topic · hard data
Recurso De Súplica Contra Auto De Veintitrés (23) De Agosto De Dos Mil Seis (2006), Mediante El Cual Se Rechazó La Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad Contra Los Incisos 3° (Parcial) Y 8° Del Artículo 1° Del Acto Legislativo 01 De 2005. Los Requisitos Que Deben Reunir Los Cargos Formulados En La Demanda. El Demandante Pretende Se Realice Un Control Material Sobre El Acto Legislativo, Lo Que Escapa Del Ambito De Competencia De Esta Corporacion. Confirma El Auto De Rechazo
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.

5 topics · 5 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.

See the operative part (22 points)
  1. PRIMERO. CONFIRMAR el auto de veintitres (23) de agosto de dos mil seis, por el cual se rechazo la demanda presentada por el ciudadano Luis Agustin Castillo Zarate los incisos 3deg (parcial) y 8deg del articulo 1deg del Acto Legislativo 01 de 2005
  2. JAIME CORDOBA TRIVINO
  3. Presidente
  4. JAIME ARAUJO RENTERIA
  5. Magistrado
  6. MANUEL JOSE CEPEDA ESPINOSA
  7. Magistrado
  8. RODRIGO ESCOBAR GIL
  9. Magistrado
  10. MARCO GERARDO MONROY CABRA
  11. Magistrado
  12. NO FIRMA
  13. NILSON ELIAS PINILLA PINILLA
  14. Magistrado
  15. CON ACLARACION DE VOTO
  16. HUMBERTO ANTONIO SIERRA PORTO
  17. Magistrado
  18. ALVARO TAFUR GALVIS
  19. Magistrado
  20. CLARA INES VARGAS HERNANDEZ
  21. Magistrada
  22. MARTHA VICTORIA SACHICA DE MONCALEANO
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.

Appears in the rulingN1 · hard data
Separate opinions — text available1
ConcurrenceNilson Pinilla Pinilla
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.

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.