JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)October 7, 2015

A- de 2015

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

Reporting justice Jorge Ignacio Pretelt Chaljub

✓Claimant Juan Pablo Bonilla, Apoderado De Corpoica

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.

Solicitud De Nulidad Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Negar por cuanto no se incurrió en ninguna de las causales invocadas
  • Requisitos formales y materiales de procedencia
1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de nulidad de la sentencia T-715/14.

El apoderado judicial de CORPOICA fundamentó la petición de nulidad en el cambio de jurisprudencia por parte de una Sala de Revisión, el desconocimiento del precedente relacionado con la improcedencia de la acción de tutela frente a controversias contractuales, el dejar de analizar, de manera arbitraria, asuntos de relevancia constitucional y, la declaratoria unilateral del incumplimiento del contrato de crédito educativo.

Luego de analizar cada uno de los argumentos alegados por el memorialista, la Sala Plena decidió DENEGAR la solicitud de nulidad presentada

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. DENEGAR la solicitud de nulidad de la Sentencia T-715 de 2014 proferida por la Sala Séptima de Revisión.
  2. SEGUNDO. Contra este pronunciamiento no procede recurso alguno.
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 available2
ConcurrenceJorge Ignacio Pretelt ChaljubConcurrenceMaría Victoria Calle Correa
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.