JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)October 12, 2001

T-1089 de 2001

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

Reporting justice Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa

✓Claimant Oscar De Jesus Castrillon Quinceno Vs. Iss Medellin·Respondent Sin Información

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho De Peticion. Solicitud Informacion De Los Requisitos Para Acceder A La Pension De Invalidez Respuesta Clara Y Oportuna. Silencio Administrativo. 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.

Derecho De Peticion
  • Pronta resolución
  • Alcance
  • Falta de competencia de la entidad ante quien se solicita la información no la exonera de contestar
Derecho De Petición
  • Núcleo esencial
2 topics · 4 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 del 8 de mayo de 2001, proferida por el Juzgado Promiscuo de Familia de Fredonia, Antioquia, en el proceso de OSCAR DE JESÚS CASTRILLÓN QUINCENO contra el Gerente Regional del Instituto de Seguros Sociales EPS.
  2. Segundo. CONCEDER la tutela del derecho fundamental de petición al señor OSCAR DE JESÚS CASTRILLÓN QUINCENO, y en consecuencia, ORDENAR al Gerente Regional del Instituto de Seguros Sociales EPS en Medellín que, en el término de cuarenta y ocho (48) horas contado a partir de la notificación de la presente sentencia, proceda a dar respuesta a la solicitud presentada por el accionante ante dicha dependencia por intermedio de la Personería Municipal de Fredonia.
  3. Tercero. Por secretaría, líbrese 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.