JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)January 27, 2005

T-045 de 2005

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

Reporting justice Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra

✓Claimant Fernando Enrique Rivaldo Iparraguirre Vs. Fondo De Pensiones Porvenir

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.

Acción De Tutela
  • Hecho superado por reconocimiento de pensión de invalidez
2 topics · 2 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 a quien la entidad no le reconoce su pension por la no emisión del bono pensional.

Solicita se ordene el reconocimiento de la pension de invalidezs a que tiene derecho habiéndosele determinado un 61.48% de incapacidad.

Hecho superado por el reconocimiento de la pension de invalidez.

Negada

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. CONFIRMAR la Sentencia proferida por el Juzgado 47 Civil Municipal de Bogotá, el 16 de septiembre de 2004, únicamente por la existencia de un hecho superado, y, en consecuencia, NEGAR la tutela al derecho fundamental de petición en materia de pensiones de Fernando Enrique Rivaldo Iparraguirre.
  2. SEGUNDO. Para los efectos del artículo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991, el juzgado de origen hará las notificaciones y tomará las medidas conducentes para el cumplimiento de esta sentencia.
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.