JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)July 3, 2002Full bench

C-507 de 2002

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Jorge Humberto Romero Monastoque

✓
Topic · hard data
Fuerzas Militares. Inembargabilidad Y Descuentos En Asignaciones De Retiro, Pensiones Y Demás Prestaciones Sociales
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.

Salario
  • Asunción de criterio sobre inembargabilidad
  • Embargabilidad como principio general y excepciones
Fuerzas Militares
  • Inembargabilidad y descuentos en asignaciones de retiro, pensiones y demás prestaciones sociales
Pension De Jubilacion
  • Inembargabilidad
Pensiones Legales
  • Excepciones a inembargabilidad
  • Facultad legislativa para establecer medidas de protección
  • Inembargabilidad como regla general
5 topics · 8 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Decreto 1211 de 1990.

Art. 173 inc. 1.

Reforma estatuto del personal de oficiales y suboficiales de las fuerzas militares.

Inembargabilidad y descuentos de las asignaciones de retiro pensiones y prestaciones sociales excepto embargo por alimentos o creditos

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

What it decided

Holdings on Decreto 1211/90. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 173Decreto 1211/90 «inciso 1»UPHELD
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. Declarar exequible el inciso
  2. primero. del artículo 173 del Decreto 1211 de 1990 "Por el cual se reforma el Estatuto del Personal de Oficiales y Suboficiales de las Fuerzas Militares."
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
ConcurrenceEduardo Montealegre Lynett
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.