JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)May 22, 2003Full bench

C-408 de 2003

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

Reporting justice Jaime Araujo Rentería

✓Claimant Jorge Roosevelt Davila Luna

✓
Topic · hard data
Ley 675 De 2001. Art. 29 Inc. 4. Propiedad Horizontal. Contribucion Y Participacion En Expensas Comunes. Escritura De Transferencia De Dominio De Bien Inmueble. Solicitud Paz Y Salvo Expedido Por Representante Legal De La Copropiedad. Potestad De Configur
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.

Propiedad Horizontal
  • Escritura pública de constitución debe contener el Reglamento
  • Obligaciones a cargo de los propietarios de bienes privados
  • Representación legal y administración
  • Combina la propiedad individual y la copropiedad sobre un edificio o conjunto
  • Constitución
  • Exigencia de paz y salvo para transferencia de dominio
  • Exigencia de paz y salvo para transferencia de dominio no limita la facultad de disposición del propietario
  • Exigencia de paz y salvo se ciñe al criterio de razonabilidad
  • Forma especial de dominio
  • Organo de dirección
  • Regulación
Derecho De Propiedad
  • Elementos
  • Titularidad
3 topics · 14 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Ley 675/01. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 29Ley 675/01UPHELD
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 Constitucion,
  2. R E S U E L V E :
  3. Declarar EXEQUIBLE el Art. 29, inciso 4o, de la Ley 675 de 2001, por el cargo examinado en 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.