JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)December 6, 2007

T-1054 de 2007

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

Reporting justice Clara Inés Vargas Hernández

✓Claimant Fredy Eduardo Rincon Montañez Vs. Saludcoop

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
  • EPS se niega a realizar examen de resonancia magnética y medio de contraste por estar excluido del POS
  • Hecho superado por haber sido practicado el examen solicitado
1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Derecho a la vida la salud y la integridad fisica de afiliado que padece rinitis aguda a quien la entidad se niega a autorizarle un examen de resonancia magnetica con medio de contraste gadolinio ordenado por su medico tratante aduciendo que se encuentra excluido del pos.solicita se ordene autorizar el examen formulado por su medico.hecho superado por haber sido practicado el procedimiento solicitado.carencia actual de objeto

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
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. DECLARAR la carencia actual de objeto por existir hecho superado, por las razones y en los términos de esta sentencia.
  2. SEGUNDO. CONFIRMAR el fallo proferido por el Juzgado
  3. Primero. Civil Municipal de Sogamoso.
  4. TERCERO. PREVENIR a la EPS Saludcoop, para que en lo sucesivo se abstenga de incurrir en las conductas que dieron origen a la presente acción de tutela.
  5. CUARTO. LÍBRESE por Secretaría General 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.