JurídicoESEN
Unification ruling (SU)November 25, 1998Full bench

SU- de 1998

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

Reporting justice Carlos Gaviria Díaz

✓Claimant Miguel Angel Castro

✓
Topic · hard data
Debido Proceso. Acceso A La Administracion De Justicia. Falta De Legitimacion En La Causa. Demanda De Constitucion De Parte Civil. Sindicato De E.A.A.B. Carencia De Objeto. Negada.
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.

Accion Civil Popular En Proceso Penal
  • Actor puede penetrar en el ámbito de defensa de intereses comunitarios
  • Asunción por sindicato
  • No pueden exigirse exclusivamente al actor intereses pecuniarios
Accion Civil Popular
  • Interpretación dentro del marco filosófico de la Constitución
  • Alcance
Parte Civil En Proceso Penal
  • Perjuicios propios y personas determinables
  • Resarcimiento de perjuicios
3 topics · 7 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

This decision records no constitutional review holdings. This is common in tutela rulings and orders, where the decision does not concern a legal provision.
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

  1. Primero. CONFIRMAR la sentencia proferida por el Juzgado Veintiuno Penal del Circuito de Santafé de Bogotá el 22 de enero de 1998, por medio de la cual se negó la tutela solicitada por el representante legal del Sindicato de Trabajadores de la Empresa de Acueducto y Alcantarillado de Bogotá.
  2. Segundo. COMUNICAR esta providencia al Juzgado Veintiuno Penal del Circuito de Santafé de Bogotá, para los efectos previstos en el artículo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  3. Comuníquese, notifíquese, cúmplase e
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.