JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)February 11, 1998Full bench

C-024 de 1998

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

Reporting justice Hernando Herrera Vergara

✓Claimant Dario Gaviria Caicedo

✓
Topic · hard data
Dec. 1214/90. Arts. 60 Y 62. Jornada De Trabajo Y Prohibicion De Pago De Horas Extras De Empleados De Min-Defensa Y Policia Nal. Exequible.
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.

Derecho Al Trabajo
  • Periodos de descanso
Jornada Laboral
  • Tiempo máximo
Personal Del Ministerio De Defensa Y Policia Nacional
  • Pago de horas extras en casos excepcionales
Ministerio De Defensa Y Policia Nacional
  • Permanente disponibilidad del trabajador
Norma Legal
  • Improcedencia de modificación por sentencia
Personal De Las Fuerzas Militares Y Policia Nacional
  • Discriminación en compensación por horas extras
10 topics · 9 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Decreto 1214/90. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 60Decreto 1214/90UPHELD
Art. 62Decreto 1214/90UPHELD
2 holdings · source: operative part of the ruling
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

See the operative part (4 points)
  1. en nombre del pueblo y por mandato de la Constitución,
  2. R E S U E L V E :
  3. Primero. Declarar EXEQUIBLE el artículo 60 del Decreto1214 de 1990.
  4. Segundo. Declarar EXEQUIBLE el artículo 62 del Decreto 1214 de 1990, salvo que por razones especiales, a juicio de la autoridad nominadora, se haga indispensable por necesidades del servicio, el trabajo por un tiempo mayor al de la jornada reglamentaria, caso en el cual deberá decretarse el reconocimiento y pago de horas extras o el descanso compensatorio, dentro de la disponibilidad presupuestal correspondiente, y conforme a lo expuesto en la parte motiva de esta providencia.
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 available1
DissentJosé Gregorio Hernández Galindo
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.