A- de 2021
The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.
Reporting justice Jorge Enrique Ibáñez Najar
✓Claimant William Esteban Gomez Molina
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.
- Rechazar por improcedente
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)
Solicitud de nulidad del Auto 339/21.
El peticionario adujo que la precitada providencia, al haber confirmado el rechazo de la demanda, implicó una violación ostensible, probada, significativa y trascendental al debido proceso, que conlleva a su nulidad y, como consecuencia de ello, a que la Sala Plena de la Corporación dicte un nuevo auto que resuelva el recurso de súplica interpuesto.
Tras comprobar que no se satisfacen todos los requisitos formales de procedencia, específicamente, por no presentar una argumentación suficiente y adecuada se RECHAZA la nulidad formulada en esta oportunidad.
What it decided
Operative part (Resuelve)
✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.
- PRIMERO. RECHAZAR, por no presentar una argumentacion adecuada y suficiente, la solicitud de nulidad del Auto 339 de 2021, hecha por el ciudadano William Esteban Gomez Molina.
- SEGUNDO. CONTRA esta decision no procede recurso alguno.
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.
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 indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.