JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)August 26, 1993Full bench

C-345 de 1993

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

Reporting justice Alejandro Martínez Caballero

✓Claimant Felix Hoyos

✓
Topic · hard data
Dec. 01/84. C.C.A. Arts 131 Num 6 Lit B Y 132 Num 6 Inc 3 Parte Final. Cuantias En Primera Y Unica Instancia En Materia Laboral. Inexequibles
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.

02

What it decided

Holdings on Decreto 1/84. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 131Decreto 1/84STRUCK DOWN
Phrase struck down«inciso 2 literal b»
Art. 2Decreto 597/88STRUCK DOWN
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 (6 points)
  1. en nombre del pueblo y por mandato de la Constitucion Nacional,
  2. R E S U E L V E :
  3. PRIMERO. Declarar INEXEQUIBLE el articulo 2deg del Decreto 597 de 1988, en cuanto modifico el articulo 131 numeral 6deg literal b) inciso 2deg del Codigo Contencioso Administrativo (Decreto Ley 01 de l984), que dice:
  4. Sin embargo, de los procesos sobre actos de destitucion, declaracion de insubsistencia, revocacion de nombramiento o cualesquiera otros que impliquen retiro del servicio, conoceran en unica instancia los Tribunales Administrativos cuando la asignacion mensual correspondiente al cargo no exceda de ochenta mil pesos ($80.000.oo).
  5. SEGUNDO. Declarar INEXEQUIBLE el articulo 2deg del Decreto 597 de 1988, en cuanto modifico el articulo 132 numeral 6deg inciso 3deg parte final, del Codigo Contencioso Administrativo, que dice:
  6. cuando la asignacion mensual correspondiente al cargo exceda de ochenta mil pesos ($80.000.oo).
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
DissentJorge Arango Mejía
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.