JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)February 20, 2003

T-143 de 2003

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 Noralba Garcia Moreno Vs. Iss

✓
Topic · hard data
Derechos Al Debido Proceso Defensa Conformacion Ejercicio Del Poder Politico Honra Y Buen Nombre. Controversia Contra Acto Que Impone Sancion Disciplinaria. 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.

Accion De Tutela Transitoria
  • Inexistencia de perjuicio irremediable
Perjuicio Irremediable
  • Elementos para que se configure
Proceso Disciplinario O Sancion Disciplinaria
  • No vulnera el buen nombre
  • No constituye un perjuicio irremediable
Accion De Tutela Contra Acto Administrativo
  • Improcedencia como mecanismo transitorio
Accion De Tutela Y Accion Contencioso Administrativa
  • Improcedencia para controvertir sanción disciplinaria
Medio De Defensa Judicial
  • Nulidad de acto administrativo
6 topics · 7 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. R E S U E L V E
  2. Primero. CONFIRMAR las sentencias del Juez 17 Penal del Circuito de Bogota y de la Sala Penal del Tribunal Superior de Bogota, proferidas respectivamente los dias 17 de mayo y 21 de junio de 2002, en las cuales se nego por improcedente la accion de tutela instaurada por Noralba Garcia Moreno.
  3. Segundo. Por Secretaria, librese la comunicacion prevista en el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  4. Notifiquese, comuniquese,
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.