JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)August 9, 2000

T-1034 de 2000

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

Reporting justice Alejandro Martínez Caballero

✓Claimant Carmen Roxina Ortiz Lopez Y Otros Vs. Hotel Palace De San Andres Isla.

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho Al Trabajo Y A La Seguridad Social. Improcedencia De La Accion De Tutela Para El Pago De Acreencias Laborales. Transferencia De La Cotizacion En Salud. Accion De Tutela Y El Subsidio Familiar. 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
  • Improcedencia general para reclamar pago de acreencias laborales
  • Procedencia excepcional pago y transferencia de cotizaciones al sistema de seguridad social
Subsidio Familiar
  • Improcedencia de reclamación por tutela
  • Naturaleza
Empleador
  • Consecuencias por no pago de aportes en salud
Derecho Al Subsidio Familiar
  • En principio no es fundamental
4 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 (2 points)
  1. Primero. CONFIRMAR en todas sus partes el fallo proferido por el Juzgado Laboral del Circuito de San Andrés Isla, el 1º de marzo de 2000, dentro de la acción de tutela interpuesta por Carmen Roxina Ortíz López, Claudia Yaneth Hareiza López, Miled Nieto Arboleda, Lacides Herazo Moreno, Jorge Leguía, William Ahumada Castro, Aqueda Maria Bellido, Delfina Palacio Murillo, Juliana Salgado, Julia Domínguez, Candida Salgado, Virgelina Martínez, Roberto Marquez, Mercedes Guzmán, Regina Lobo Ariza, Felix Bolaño, Oneyda Mendoza Barraza, Madelvis Gómez Bolaño, Narciza Aguilar Chico, Rosalba Marengo Cabarcas, Temilda Garcés, Amelia Zuñiga, Marbel Marengo, Liliana Perdomo, José Luis Cervantes, Rufina Isabel Ricardo, Leadith Medrano Delgado, Yadira Arroyo Martínez, María Emperatriz Arroyo, María Teresa Atencio, Liliana Castrillón Leyton; contra el Hotel Palace de San Andrés Isla.
  2. Segundo. LÍBRESE por Secretaría la comunicación de que trata el artículo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991, para los efectos allí contemplados.
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.