JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)November 14, 2007Full bench

C-961 de 2007

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

Reporting justice Nilson Elías Pinilla Pinilla

✓Claimant Franky Urrego Ortiz

✓
Topic · hard data
Fallo Inhibitorio Por Ineptitud De Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad Contra Norma Del Codigo De Infancia Y Adolescencia
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.

Inhibicion De La Corte Constitucional
  • Ineptitud sustantiva de la demanda
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Ley 1098 de 2006 articulo 6º (parcial).

Se expide el codigo de la infancia y la adolescencia.

Reglas de interpretacion y aplicacion.el demandante considera que la disposicion acusada desconoce los articulos 4 y 93 de la constitucion politica.inhibicion de la corte para proferir una decision de fondo por ineptitud sustantiva pues no se advierte en el precepto impugnado ninguna expresion que permita darle el sentido restrictivo otorgado por el actor.inhibida

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

What it decided

Holdings on Ley 1098/06. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 6Ley 1098/06DECLINED TO RULE
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. RESUELVE
  3. INHIBIRSE de emitir pronunciamiento de fondo sobre la constitucionalidad del articulo 6deg (parcial) de la Ley 1098 de 2006, "por la cual se expide el Codigo de la Infancia y la Adolescencia".
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.