JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)March 13, 2013Full bench

C-126 de 2013

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

Reporting justice Alexei Egor Julio Estrada

✓Claimant Mauricio Fernando Rodriguez Tamayo·Respondent Ley 1551 De 2012, Articulo 45 Parcial

✓
Topic · hard data
Fallo Inhibitorio Por Ineptitud Sustantiva De La Demanda De Norma De La Ley 1551 De 2012
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.

Inhibicion De La Corte Constitucional Por Ineptitud Sustantva De La Demanda
  • Ausencia de argumentos y razones en cargos de inconstitucionalidad
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Demanda de inconstitucionalidad contra el artículo 45 (parcial) de la Ley 1551 de 2012, por la cual se dictan normas para modernizar la organización y el funcionamiento de los gobiernos.

El demandante considera que las medidas adoptadas en la norma acusada generan la imposibilidad jurídica de reclamar la garantía de las obligaciones crediticias incumplidas por parte de un municipio, con lo que se vulnera los artículos constitucionales 2, 13, 58 y 95-7.

La Corte concluyó que las razones expuestas como fundamento del cargo de inconstitucionalidad parten de una interpretación que no tiene la norma acusada, por lo que resulta inviable entrar a un análisis y decisión de fondo sobre su constitucionalidad.

La Sala se declare INHIBIDA para emitir un pronunciamiento de fondo.

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
02

What it decided

Holdings on Ley 1551/12. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 45Ley 1551/12 «parcial»DECLINED TO RULE
1 holding · 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.

  1. Declararse INHIBIDA para decidir sobre la constitucionalidad de los incisos primero,
  2. segundo. y
  3. tercero. del articulo 45 de la Ley 1551 de 2012.
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.