JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)November 17, 2004

T-1150 de 2004

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

Reporting justice Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto

✓Claimant Maria Arally Suarez Tamayo Vs. Iss

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho De Peticion De Beneficiaria De Pension De Sobrevivientes A Quien No Obstante Haber Formulado La Solicitud No Le Ha Sido Resuelta. Contenido Y Alcance Del Derecho Fundamental De Peticion. Terminos Para Resolver Una Solicitud Relativa A Una Pension
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 En Materia Pensional
  • Término de cuatro y seis meses para resolver reconocimiento y pago
  • Término de quince días para resolver asuntos dentro del trámite de pensión
Derecho De Peticion
  • Alcance y pronta resolución
Derecho De Petición
  • Núcleo esencial
4 topics · 5 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. CONFIRMAR el fallo proferido por el Juzgado
  2. Octavo. Laboral del Circuito de Medellín, en cuanto tuteló el derecho de petición de la señora MARIA ARALLY SUAREZ TAMAYO y se ordenó al Instituto de los Seguros Sociales resolver de fondo la solicitud presentada por la accionante.
  3. Segundo. Modificar el numeral
  4. segundo. del fallo mencionado, y ordenar al ISS Seccional Antioquia que si todavía no lo ha hecho, en el término de cuarenta y ocho horas siguientes a la notificación de esta sentencia, resuelva de fondo, sobre la petición elevada por la accionante y le notifique su decisión.
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.