JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)December 3, 2020

A- de 2020

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

Reporting justice Richard Steve Ramírez Grisales

✓Claimant James Parra Duran

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.

Recurso De Suplica Contra Auto Que Rechaza Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Improcedencia por cuanto el recurso de súplica no presenta argumentos que desvirtúen las razones constitutivas del rechazo de la demanda
  • Se confirma rechazo por haber operado el fenómeno de cosa juzgada
1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de súplica.

La demanda fue rechazada porque se configuró una cosa juzgada constitucional al expedirse la sentencia C-145/20, que declaró exequible el Decreto 417 de 2020.

Teniendo en cuenta que el accionante no formuló argumento alguno que diera cuenta de un error o equivocación de la providencia de rechazo que permitiera a la Corporación pronunciarse de fondo sobre el recurso interpuesto, se decidió CONFIRMAR la disposición recurrida.

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 de 6 de noviembre de 2020, proferido por el magistrado Alberto Rojas Rios, que rechazo la demanda de inconstitucionalidad D-14017.
  2. Segundo. ADVERTIR que en contra de esta providencia no procede recurso alguno.
  3. Tercero. ARCHIVAR el expediente D-14017.
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.