JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)February 7, 2003

T-093 de 2003

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

Reporting justice Rodrigo Escobar Gil

✓Claimant Rosa Cecilia Osorio Calderon Vs. Fiscalia General De La Nacion Valledupar

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Igualdad Y Minimo Vital. Solicitud Pago Salarios De Compañero Permanente Secuestrado. Limites A La Reclamacion. Deber De Solidaridad Del Empleador. Error Judicial Por Indebida Aplicación. Negada.
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
  • Procedencia reclamo de salarios de secuestrados
  • Razones para protección temporal a familia del secuestrado
Empleador
  • Pago de salarios a secuestrado por tiempo definido
Derecho Al Trabajo
  • Pago oportuno de salarios
Error Judicial
  • No constituye título para reclamar determinada prestación
Salario
  • Pago a beneficiarios del secuestrado
5 topics · 6 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. CONFIRMAR la Sentencia de septiembre 4 de 2002, proferida por la Sala Laboral de la Corte Suprema de Justicia.
  2. Segundo. En consecuencia DENEGAR la protección de los derechos invocados dentro del proceso de la referencia.
  3. Tercero. COMUNICAR la presente acción a la Corte Suprema de Justicia -Sala Laboral -, al Tribunal Superior de Valledupar -Sala Laboral, Civil, Familia -, a la Fiscalía General de la Nación
  4. Cuarto. DESE cumplimiento a lo previsto por 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.