JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)August 10, 2000Full bench

C-1050 de 2000

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

Reporting justice Antonio Barrera Carbonell

✓Claimant Jorge Enrique Osorio Reyes.

✓
Topic · hard data
Decreto 2701 De 1988. Art. 49 Parcial. Paragrafo. Regimen Prestacional De Los Empleados Publicos Y Trabajadores Oficiales Adscritos O Vinculados Al Ministerio De Defensa Nacional. Sustitucion Pensional Perdida De Este Derecho Por Nuevas Nupcias. Inexequible.
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.

4 topics · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Decreto 2701/88. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 1Decreto 2701/88STRUCK DOWN
Art. 49Decreto 2701/88STRUCK DOWN· phrase
Phrase struck down«parágrafo 1»
Art. 49Decreto 2701/88STRUCK DOWN· phrase
Phrase struck down«parágrafo 1»
3 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 (3 points)
  1. PRIMERO. Declarar INEXEQUIBLES las expresiones "o cuando contraiga nuevas nupcias o haga vida marital" contenidas en el paragrafo
  2. primero. del artículo 49 del Decreto - Ley 2701 de 1988.
  3. SEGUNDO. Las viudas y viudos que con posterioridad al siete de julio de 1991 hubieren contraído nuevas nupcias o hecho vida marital y, por este motivo, hayan perdido el derecho a la pensión de que tratan las normas mencionadas, podrán, como consecuencia de esta providencia, y a fin de que se vean restablecidos sus derechos constitucionales vulnerados, reclamar de las autoridades competentes las mesadas que se causen a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia.
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.

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.