JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 27, 2002

A- de 2002

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

Reporting justice Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa

✓Claimant Distribuidora Coches La Sabana S.A. Y Otros

✓
Topic · hard data
Conflicto De Competencia
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.

2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Se remitió el expediente de la referencia al Consejo Seccional de la Judicatura de Cundinamarca para que ejerciendo sus competencias constitucionales y legales, decida sobre la acción de tutela presentada.

Para la Corte es extraño que el citado Consejo Seccional no hubiese dado razón alguna que justificara su interpretación del Decreto reglamentario 1382 de 2000, máxime cuando el Decreto en cuestión estableció de manera clara y expresa que las acciones presentadas contra una autoridad pública del orden nacional como la Superintendencia de Industria y Comercio debía ser repartida a los Consejos Seccionales de la Judicatura tal y como se dispuso en la parte resolutiva.

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. Remitir, por intermedio de Secretaria General, el expediente de la referencia al Consejo Seccional de la Judicatura de Cundinamarca, para que, ejerciendo sus competencias constitucionales y legales, decida sobre la accion de tutela presentada.
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.

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.