JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 15, 2020

A- de 2020

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

Reporting justice Cristina Pardo Schlesinger

✓Claimant David Mauricio Uribe Marin

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)

Recurso de súplica.

El rechazo se dio porque el actor no atendió las indicaciones dadas en el auto de inadmisión para subsanar las falencias identificadas en su demanda.

La Sala Plena de la Corporación consideró que el recurso formulado no desarrolló la argumentación necesaria para identificar los errores en que habría incurrido la providencia cuestionada y, por ello, decidió CONFIRMARLA en su integridad.

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.

See the operative part (4 points)
  1. PRIMERO. RECHAZAR por falta de pertinencia las recusaciones presentadas por el senor David Mauricio Uribe Marin en contra de los magistrados Diana Fajardo Rivera, Alberto Rojas Rios y Alejandro Linares Cantillo, por las razones expuestas en este auto.
  2. SEGUNDO. CONFIRMAR en su integridad el auto del 17 de junio de 2020, proferido por la magistrada Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado, mediante el cual rechazo la demanda interpuesta por el ciudadano David Mauricio Uribe Marin contra los articulos 20, 27 y 29 de la Ley 65 de 1993.
  3. TERCERO. Por intermedio de la Secretaria General, COMUNIQUESE el contenido de esta decision a la demandante, advirtiendo que contra ella no procede recurso alguno.
  4. CUARTO. Una vez quede ejecutoriado el presente auto, ARCHIVESE el expediente.
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.