JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)February 22, 1994

T-067 de 1994

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

Reporting justice José Gregorio Hernández Galindo

✓Claimant Rafael Lobelo Stave

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. A La Salud. Der. A La Vida. Atencion A Los Disminuidos Fisicos. I.S.S. 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.

6 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. REVOCAR la sentencia proferida en segunda instancia por el Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Montería, Sala de Decisión Laboral, el cinco (5) de octubre de mil novecientos noventa y tres (1993).
  2. Segundo. CONCEDER la tutela solicitada por RAFAEL GUILLERMO LOBELO STAVE a nombre de su hijo menor CARLOS ALBERTO LOBELO PASTRANA.
  3. En consecuencia, ORDENASE al Instituto de Seguros Sociales -Seccional Córdoba- que en un término no superior a las cuarenta y ocho (48) horas contadas a partir del presente fallo, reanude el tratamiento, la fisioterapia, los controles periódicos y las prestaciones médicas y hospitalarias que requiera el joven CARLOS ALBERTO LOBELO PASTRANA. El Instituto le brindará protección especial y atención médica, según los mandatos de los artículos 13, inciso 3º, y 47 de la Constitución, mientras así lo requiera en razón de las limitaciones que padece.
  4. Tercero. LIBRESE la comunicación prevista en 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.