JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)November 28, 2002

T-1055 de 2002

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 Luis Carlos Rojas Jaramillo Vs. Ministerio De Hacienda Y Credito Publico

✓
Topic · hard data
Derechos A La Vida Seguridad Social Y Peticion. Solicitud Reconocimiento Pension De Vejez. Emision Bono Pensional O Cuota Parte. Demora Injustificada. Carencia Actual De Objeto. Hecho Superado. Sustraccion De Materia Cajanal. 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.

Derechos Fundamentales
  • Vulneración por dilación en trámite administrativo para emisión del bono pensional
Acción De Tutela
  • Hecho superado
Derecho A La Pension De Jubilacion
  • Controversias entre el Seguro Social y las entidades de emitir los bonos pensionales o cuotas partes
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 (4 points)
  1. Primero. LEVANTAR la suspensión del término decretada para decidir el presente asunto.
  2. Segundo. REVOCAR, por las razones expuestas en la presente sentencia, el fallo de tutela dictado por el Juzgado 11 Laboral del Circuito de Bogotá el 10 de diciembre de 2001.
  3. Tercero. DECLARAR la carencia actual de objeto, por la razón señalada de manera precisa en la parte motiva de esta providencia.
  4. Cuarto. ORDENAR que por la Secretaría se de cumplimiento a 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.