JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)December 2, 2002

T-1056 de 2002

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

Reporting justice Jaime Araujo Rentería

✓Claimant Luis Octavio Moreno Torres Y Otros Vs. Sena

✓
Topic · hard data
Derechos Al Debido Proceso Defensa Vida Seguridad Social Y Subsistencia. Incremento Aportes Para Salud Sin Consentimiento De Los Titulares. Contribuciones Parafiscales. Principio De Solidaridad. 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.

Contribucion Parafiscal
  • Cotización a seguridad social
  • Obligatoriedad de cotización en salud
  • Definición
Derecho A La Seguridad Social
  • Descuentos por aportes a salud son autorizados por ley
Pensiones Legales
  • Aumentos en descuentos por aportes a salud deben ser autorizados por ley
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 (3 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la sentencia de 28 de junio de 2002 proferida por la Sala Laboral del Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Cali, dentro del proceso de tutela instaurado por Luis Octavio Moreno Torres, Camilo Torres Salazar, Maria del Carmen Gabriela Fajardo, Leonel Ramirez Vera y Jose Alcides Ladino contra el Servicio Nacional de Aprendizaje - SENA (Regional Valle), por medio de la cual se accedio al amparo solicitado.
  2. Segundo. En su lugar, denegar la proteccion solicitada por los peticionarios.
  3. Tercero. LIBRESE por Secretaria la comunicacion de que trata el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991, para los efectos alli 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.