JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)February 23, 1993

T-064 de 1993

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

Reporting justice Ciro Angarita Baron

✓Claimant Maria Eugenia Montoya

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Educacion. Derecho A La Igualdad. Derechos Fundamentales De Los Niños. Un Cupo En El Colegio Bolivar (Cali). 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.

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 (5 points)
  1. PRIMERO. REVOCAR la providencia del Tribunal Superior de Cali del 23 de Octubre de 1992, por las razones expuestas en la parte motiva de la presente sentencia.
  2. SEGUNDO. Si los padres de la nina Sara Ramirez Montoya siguen considerando que el Colegio Bolivar es la mejor opcion educativa para ella, ORDENAR a la mencionada institucion que le otorge un cupo para el ano lectivo 1993-1994.
  3. TERCERO. En todos aquellos casos similares al presente por sus hechos o circunstancias, siempre que se le niegue un cupo a un aspirante a ingresar, con base en criterios discriminatorios, la doctrina constitucional enunciada en esta sentencia tendra CARACTER OBLIGATORIO para las autoridades, en los terminos del articulo 23 del Decreto 2067 de 1.991.
  4. CUARTO. ORDENAR que por secretaria se comunique esta providencia al Tribunal Superior de Cali y al Rector del Colegio Bolivar de Cali, en la forma y para los efectos previstos en el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  5. Notifiquese,
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.

Separate opinions — text available2
ConcurrenceEduardo Cifuentes MuñozConcurrenceJosé Gregorio Hernández Galindo
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.