JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)January 19, 2005

T-010 de 2005

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

Reporting justice Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa

✓Claimant Jose Hernan De Jesús Heredia Maldonado Vs. Iss

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.

Derecho De Peticion
  • Requisitos de la respuesta
Derecho De Peticion Ante El Seguro Social
  • Respuesta de fondo sobre reconocimiento pensión de vejez
5 topics · 5 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Derecho de peticion de afiliado que solicita el reconocimiento de la pension de vejez.

La corte ha reiterado que la definición de titularidad y el reconocimiento de una pension ante la administración constituye en principio un asunto ajeno al ambito de la jurisdiccion constitucional en sede de tutela.

Termino para resolver las solicitudes de reconocimiento de derechos pensionales.

Concedida

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
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. REVOCAR el fallo proferido por el Juzgado Catorce Civil del Circuito de Cali. En consecuencia, el Instituto de los Seguros Sociales Seccional Valle, dentro de los dos días siguientes a la notificación de la presente sentencia, si aún no lo ha hecho, deberá dar respuesta de fondo a la petición presentada por el señor José Hernán de Jesús Heredia Maldonado.
  2. Segundo. Por Secretaria General, líbrese la comunicación de que trata el artículo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
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.