JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)March 4, 1996

T-088 de 1996

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

Reporting justice Jorge Arango Mejía

✓Claimant Angel Francisco Martinez

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. De Peticion. Suministro De Medicamentos Por El I.S.S. Der. A La Vida. Der. A La Salud. Concedida Parcialmente.
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 Vida
  • No vulneración por tratamiento alterno
Derecho De Peticion
  • Procedimiento para suministro de medicamento
Instituto De Seguros Sociales
  • Suministro de medicamento
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 (3 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR PARCIALMENTE la sentencia del Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Santafé de Bogotá, de fecha 28 de agosto de 1995. En consecuencia, se concede la tutela solicitada por el señor Ángel Francisco Martínez Sanabria contra el Instituto de los Seguros Sociales, pero solamente por vulneración al derecho de petición.
  2. Segundo. Se prevendrá al Instituto de los Seguros Sociales, de conformidad con lo señalado en el artículo 24 del decreto 2591 de 1991, para que no vuelva a incurrir en la omisión explicada en las consideraciones de esta providencia.
  3. Tercero. Comuníquese esta decisión al Juzgado 73 Penal del Circuito de Santafé de Bogotá, para que sean notificadas las partes, de conformidad con lo dispuesto 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.