JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)September 26, 1996Full bench

C-482 de 1996

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

Reporting justice Hernando Herrera Vergara

✓Claimant Roberto Mutis Puyana

✓
Topic · hard data
Tasas Tarifas Y Peajes.
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.

Tasa De Peaje
  • Infraestructura del transporte
Tarifa De Peajes
  • Omisión del sistema y método
  • Autoridad competente para fijarla
  • Indeterminación de autoridad para fijarla
Tarifa De Tasas Y Contribuciones
  • Alcance del sistema y método
3 topics · 5 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Demanda de inconstitucionalidad contra el art. 21 de la Ley 105 de 1993, “por la cual se dictan disposiciones básicas sobre el transporte, se redistribuyen competencias y recursos entre la Nación y las entidades territoriales, se reglamenta la planeación en el sector transporte y se dictan otras disposiciones”.

El actor señaló que el legislador omitió determinar el sistema y el método para definir los costos y beneficios que debe tener en cuenta la autoridad encargada de fijar la tarifa de los peajes, contrariando el art. 338 de la Constitución.

La Sala Plena concluyó que la norma definió de forma general y abstracta el método de fijación de la tarifa, sin recurrir a un sistema rígido que permiten en mayor grado el capricho del intérprete.

La Corte declaró exequible el artículo 21 de la ley 105 de 1993.

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

What it decided

Holdings on Ley 105/93. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 21Ley 105/93UPHELD
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. Declárase EXEQUIBLE el artículo 21 de la ley 105 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.

Separate opinions — text available2
DissentJorge Arango MejíaDissentAntonio Barrera Carbonell
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.