JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)November 7, 2017

A- de 2017

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

Reporting justice Gloria Stella Ortiz Delgado

✓Claimant Vladimir Martin Ramos

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.

Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Improcedencia de adición o aclaración
Aclaracion O Adicion Sentencia De La Corte Constitucional
  • Procedencia excepcional cuando exista una razón objetiva de duda que impida el entendimiento de la providencia
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Solicitud de aclaración y/o adicción de la sentencia T-488/17.

El Jefe de la Oficina Jurídica de la UARIV concretó su petición al numeral tercero de la parte resolutiva de la referida providencia, en particular, respecto de la expresión “reliquidar el monto de la ayuda humanitaria”.

Para la Corte resulta evidente que la pretensión del memorialista es que se agoten temas que en esta oportunidad procesal están por fuera de su competencia.

Se NIEGA.

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. En merito de lo expuesto la Sala Quinta de Revision de Tutelas de la Corte Constitucional,
  2. RESUELVE
  3. NEGAR las solicitudes de aclaracion y adicion de la sentencia T-488 de 2017, presentadas por Vladimir Martin Ramos, Jefe de la Oficina Juridica de la Unidad para la Atencion y Reparacion Integral a las Victimas en escrito del 12 de octubre de 2017.
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.