JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)January 23, 2003

T-018 de 2003

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Gloria Ines Maldonado Vs. Asfamilias

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Salud. Solicitud Practica Resonancia Magnetica. Oportunidad En La Prestacion De Servicios Medicos. Investigacion Por Demora En Tramites Administrativos. Fallecimiento Accionante Durante El Tramite De Revision Carencia Actual De Objeto. Conced
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 A La Salud
  • Fundamental por conexidad
  • Vulneración por demora injustificada en la atención debido a trámites administrativos
Regimen Subsidiado
  • Excesiva tramitología y falta de cuidado en expedición de órdenes
Administradora Del Regimen Subsidiado
  • Fallecimiento del paciente por negligencia en trámites administrativos
Derecho A La Vida Digna
  • Demora injustificada en atención a enfermo terminal
4 topics · 5 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.

See the operative part (4 points)
  1. Primero. CONFIRMAR la sentencia proferida por el Juzgado Dieciséis Penal del Circuito de Bogotá, el 31 de octubre de 2002, pero por presentarse carencia actual de objeto.
  2. Segundo. Por Secretaría, ENVÍESE copia auténtica de este expediente a la Superintendencia Nacional de Salud, para lo que estime pertinente conforme a la ley, en virtud de haber fallecido el señor José Manuel Rodríguez Amado.
  3. Líbrense por Secretaría, las comunicaciones de que trata el artículo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  4. Notifíquese,
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.