JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)January 27, 2000

T-064 de 2000

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Marco Tulio Orozco Garcia

✓
Topic · hard data
Tutela Contra Particulares. Derecho De Peticion Frente A Particulares. Solicitud De Cesantia. Concedida.
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
  • Resolución de fondo
Derecho De Peticion Ante Empresa Privada
  • Debe expedirse ley estatutaria
Regimen Laboral Alternativo
  • Opción no puede sancionarse
3 topics · 3 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. REVOCAR la sentencia proferida por el Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Antioquia, Sala Laboral-Segunda de Decisión, el 15 de septiembre de 1999 y, en su lugar, TUTELAR el derecho de petición del señor Marco Tulio Orozco García.
  2. Segundo. ORDENAR a la Empresa Textiles Rionegro y Cia. Ltda. que en el término de cuarenta y ocho horas (48) contadas a partir de la notificación de la presente providencia, conteste el derecho de petición presentado por el señor Marco Tulio Orozco García, de conformidad con lo expresado en la parte motiva de esta sentencia.
  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.

Appears in the rulingN1 · hard data
Separate opinions — text available1
DissentEduardo Cifuentes Muñoz
Official text from the case-law reporter · the most valuable part of the ruling: the positions that did not carry the majority.
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.