JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)August 11, 1994Full bench

C-360 de 1994

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

Reporting justice Alejandro Martínez Caballero

✓Claimant Rodrigo Ivan Rios

✓
Topic · hard data
Decs. 2420/68 1748/91 2055/91 663/93. Parafiscalidad Como Patrimonio Afectado Y Formas De Organizacion Ad/Tiva. Sent Inhibitoria Y Ver <a Href=../1994/C-308-94.Rtf> C-308/94</A>.
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.

Banco Cafetero
  • Emisión de acciones
  • Transformación
Estatuto Organico
  • Sustitución de normas
Norma Legal
  • Derogación tácita
5 topics · 5 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Decreto 2420/68. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 19Decreto 2420/68 «literal b, ordinal 2º»DECLINED TO RULE
Art. 2.4.9.1.1Decreto 1748/91DECLINED TO RULE
On the entire provisionDecreto 2055/91UPHELD
Art. 264Decreto 663/93 «numeral 2, 4»UPHELD
Art. 265Decreto 663/93 «numeral 1, 3, 4, 5»UPHELD
Art. 266Decreto 663/93 «numeral 3º, 4º y 5º»UPHELD
6 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.

  1. PRIMERO. Declararse INHIBIDA para resolver sobre la constitucionalidad del literal b, ordinal 2o del articulo 19 del Decreto-Ley 2420 de 1968, del articulo 1 del Decreto-Ley 1748 de 1991 y del Decreto-Ley 2055 de 1991.
  2. SEGUNDO. Con respecto a los articulos 264 numerales 1o y 3o, 265 numeral 2o, y 266 numerales 1o y 2o del Decreto-Ley 663 de 1993, estarse a lo resuelto en la Sentencia C-308/94 del 7 de julio de 1994.
  3. TERCERO. Declarar EXEQUIBLES los articulos 264 numerales 2o y 4o, 265 numerales 1o, 3o, 4o y 5o, y 266 numerales 3o, 4o y 5o del Decreto-Ley 663 de 1993.
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.