JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)February 16, 2000Full bench

C-128 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 Nydia Andrea Suarez Uribe

✓
Topic · hard data
Inhabilidades Para Notario. Quienes En Año Anterior Hayan Desempeñado Cargo De Ministro Del Despacho, Magistrado De La Corte Suprema O Magistrado O Fiscal De Tribunal Superior
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 De Acceso A Cargos Publicos
  • Inhabilidad inconstitucional por restricción ilegítima a función pública notarial
Inhabilidades Para Notario
  • Desempeño en año anterior cargo de Ministro del Despacho, Magistrado de la Corte Suprema o Magistrado o Fiscal de Tribunal Superior
Notario
  • No intervención de Tribunales en selección
  • Inhabilidad injustificada
  • No pueden ser nombrados libremente por Gobierno
Unidad Normativa
  • Resto de la disposición
Inhabilidades
  • Desaparición de razones que la justificaron
6 topics · 8 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Dec 960 de 1970.

Art 134 (p.).

Inhabilidad de magistrado o fiscal de tribunal superior para ser notario.

Concurso para notarios.

Inexequible.

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

What it decided

Holdings on Decreto 960/70. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 134Decreto 960/70STRUCK DOWN
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. en nombre del pueblo y por mandato de la Constitución,
  2. RESUELVE:
  3. Declarar INEXEQUIBLE el artículo 134 del Decreto 960 de 1970 (Estatuto del Notariado).
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.