JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)December 9, 1993Full bench

C-569 de 1993

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

Reporting justice José Gregorio Hernández Galindo

✓Claimant Luis Alfonso Velasco

✓
Topic · hard data
Ley 50/90. Arts 6 18 20 Parcial Y 28. Reformas Al C. S.T. Cosa Juzgada. Exequible.
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.

4 topics · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

Holdings on Ley 50/90. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 18Ley 50/90 «numeral 3 y 4»DECLINED TO RULE
Art. 20Ley 50/90ESTARSE A LO RESUELTO
Art. 28Ley 50/90UPHELD
Art. 6Ley 50/90 «parágrafo transitorio»UPHELD
4 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 (4 points)
  1. Primero. ESTESE A LO RESUELTO por la H. Corte Suprema de Justicia en fallo 115 del 26 de septiembre de 1991, en lo que concierne al artículo 6º, literal d) del numeral 4, y a las expresiones "salvo que el trabajador manifieste su voluntad de acogerse al nuevo régimen", contenidas en su parágrafo transitorio, así como en lo relativo a los artículos 18, numeral 2, y 20, literal c), todos de la Ley 50 de 1990.
  2. Segundo. Declárase EXEQUIBLE el parágrafo transitorio del artículo 6º de la Ley 50 de 1990, excepto las transcritas expresiones, ya falladas por la Corte Suprema de Justicia.
  3. Tercero. Declárase EXEQUIBLE el artículo 28 de la Ley 50 de 1990.
  4. Cuarto. La Corte se INHIBE de resolver sobre la demanda instaurada contra los numerales 3º y 4º del artículo 18 de la Ley 50 de 1990, por ineptitud sustancial de la demanda.
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.