JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)December 10, 2015

A- de 2015

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 Diego Moreno Jaramillo Como Apoderado De Bernardo Moreno Villegas

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
  • Requisitos formales y materiales de procedencia
  • Negar por cuanto no existió vulneración del debido proceso
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-388/15.

Según el peticionario, el recurso lo utiliza con miras agotar los mecanismos judiciales previstos por el ordenamiento y por estimar que se vulneraron las garantías asociadas al debido proceso y a la igualdad, al haber omitido la Sala de Revisión analizar el verdadero problema jurídico formulado en la acción de tutela.

Tras considerar que los planteamientos esbozados por el peticionario no bastan para obtener una declaración de nulidad y dar lugar a una nueva sentencia, la Sala Plena decide despachar desfavorablemente la petición formulada.

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. NEGAR la solicitud de nulidad interpuesta por el senor Diego Moreno Jaramillo, en contra de la Sentencia T-388 de 2015.
  2. SEGUNDO. COMUNIQUESE la presente providencia al peticionario, con la advertencia que contra esta decision no procede ningun recurso.
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
DissentJorge Ignacio Pretelt ChaljubDissentGabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo
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.

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.