JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 24, 2010

A- de 2010

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

Reporting justice Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo

✓Claimant Luis Jaime Salgar Vegalara

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.

Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Cargos deben ser claros, ciertos, específicos, pertinentes y suficientes
Recurso De Suplica
  • No es oportunidad para corregir o modificar demanda rechazada
Recurso De Suplica Contra Auto Que Rechaza Demanda
  • Demandante debe efectuar razonamiento mínimo para constatar yerro o arbitrariedad
5 topics · 5 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de Súplica interpuesto contra el auto de rechazo con fecha 29 de julio de 2010, en el cual se reiteraron los argumentos de inconstitucionalidad de las normas acusadas, presentados en el líbelo original y en el escrito de subsanación de la demanda.

La Corte no encuentra sustentadas las razones por las cuales el accionante considera que el auto recurrido deba ser revocado, por lo tanto se confirma.

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. Primero. CONFIRMAR el Auto del 29 de julio de 2010 dictado por el Magistrado Sustanciador, Juan Carlos Henao Perez, por medio del cual rechazo la demanda de inconstitucionalidad, identificada con el numero de radicacion D- 8172, presentada por el ciudadano Luis Jaime Salgar Vegalara, contra el numeral 1o del articulo 296 y numeral 3o del articulo 298 del Estatuto Tributario, por las consideraciones expuestas en la presente providencia.
  2. Notifiquese, cumplase,
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.

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.