JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 21, 2022

A- de 2022

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

Reporting justice Paola Andrea Meneses Mosquera

✓Claimant Natalia Bernal Cano·Respondent --

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.

2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recusación formulada contra el magistrado Antonio José Lizarazo Ocampo para participar en la decisión de las solicitudes de nulidad de los autos 480A/20, 088/21, 178/21 y 752/21 y de la sentencia C-055/22, providencias adoptadas en el expediente D-13956.

Ante la falta de cumplimiento del presupuesto de legitimación por activa, consideró la Sala Plena de la Corporación que no era necesario entrar a valorar si los demás presupuestos se cumplían o no, habida cuenta de que la no acreditación de aquel es suficiente para despachar de manera desfavorable la recusación formulada en esta oportunidad.

Se RECHAZA por falta de pertinencia.

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. RECHAZAR por falta de pertinencia la recusación presentada por la ciudadana Natalia Bernal Cano dentro del proceso de la referencia, en contra del magistrado Antonio José Lizarazo Ocampo, dado que no se cumple con el presupuesto de legitimación por parte de la recusante.
  2. SEGUNDO. Contra esta providencia 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.

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.