JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)March 31, 1998

T-125 de 1998

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

Reporting justice Alejandro Martínez Caballero

✓Claimant Rosa Franco De Betancur

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. A La Salud Y A La Vida. Enfermedades Catastroficas. Suministro De Medicamentos Por E.P.S. 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.

Entidad Promotora De Salud Privada
  • Prestación del servicio según delegación estatal
Entidad Promotora De Salud
  • Repetición contra el Estado por medicamentos que no figuran en listado
2 topics · 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 (3 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la decision del Tribunal Superior de Medellin, Sala Penal, pronunciada en la tutela de la referencia el 11 de noviembre de 1997, y, en su lugar CONFIRMAR el fallo de primera instancia del Juzgado 1deg Penal del Circuito de Medellin el 23 de septiembre de 1997, que concedio la tutela ordenando el suministro a la accionante de la medicina "megace", en el termino de 48 horas, con la ADICION de que la E. P. S. UNIMEC podra tener en cuenta el valor total del suministro del medicamento "megace" y si dicho precio es superior a otro medicamento que reemplace o sea similar al "megace segun el Manual de Medicamentos Terapeutica", la diferencia sera cubierta por el Fondo de Solidaridad y Garantia.
  2. Segundo. Para los efectos del articulo 36 del Derecho 2591 de 1991, el Tribunal de origen hara las notificaciones y tomara las medidas adecuadas.
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.