JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)December 9, 2004

T-1239 de 2004

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

Reporting justice Rodrigo Escobar Gil

✓Claimant Maria Del Carmen Gonzalez Vs. Inpec

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Vida Salud E Igualdad De Interno A Quien Se Le Ha Concedido Libertad Provisional Por El Retardo Injustificado Del Inpec De Remitirlo A La Clinica De Reposo En Donde Recibiria El Tratamiento Hospitalario Que Requiere Tutela Interpuesta Por La
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 A La Salud
  • Fundamental por conexidad
Derecho A La Salud Del Interno
  • Atención médica adecuada, digna y oportuna
  • Preservación por el Estado
Establecimiento Carcelario
  • No está obligado a prestar el servicio de salud cuando hay libertad provisional o no hay pena privativa de la libertad
3 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 (4 points)
  1. PRIMERO. REANUDAR los términos dentro del proceso de tutela T-878.366, los cuales fueron suspendidos por orden de esta Sala Quinta de Revisión mediante Auto del 30 de julio de 2004.
  2. SEGUNDO. CONFIRMAR la sentencia proferida por el Juzgado
  3. Sexto. Penal del Circuito de Santiago de Cali, dentro de la acción de tutela instaurada por María del Carmen González contra el Instituto Nacional Penitenciario y Carcelario.
  4. TERCERO. DÉSE cumplimiento a lo previsto por 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.