JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)September 20, 2000

T-1218 de 2000

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

Reporting justice Alejandro Martínez Caballero

✓Claimant Bertha Eugenia Hoyos Aristizabal Y Otros Vs. Gobernador De Antioquia.

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Igualdad Y Al Trabajo. Pago De Acreencias Laborales. No Afectacion Del Minimo Vital. 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.

Derecho Al Minimo Vital Del Trabajador
  • No afectación por no pago de primas complementarias de salario a educadores
  • Presunción de afectación por ausencia prolongada en pago de salarios
1 topic · 2 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 (2 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR las decisiones proferidas por el Juzgado Penal del Circuito de Santuario (Antioquia) y por el Juzgado Promiscuo Municipal de Cocorna (Antioquia), en cuanto concedieron las tutelas interpuestas por Bertha Eugenia Hoyos Aristizabal, Bertha Dolly Garcia Giraldo, Olga Irene Garcia Quintero, Margarita Maria Salazar de G., Amado de Jesus Giraldo Goez, Luz Estella Gomez Jimenez, Maria Margarita Idarraga Amaya, Juvenal Rivera Henao, Aura Elena Yepes Giraldo, Barbara Resfa Ramirez Hoyos, Maria Olga Hoyos Aristizabal, Amanda Lucelly Giraldo Tobon, Mariela Esther Lopez Lopez, Trinidad Estella Cadavid Osorio, Martha Nelly Zuluaga Lopez, Blanca Margarita Munoz de Gonzalez y Gloria Estela Quintero. En su lugar NEGAR las acciones de tutela de la referencia, con base en las consideraciones aqui expuestas.
  2. Segundo. Por Secretaria librese la comunicacion de que trata el articulo 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.