JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)November 14, 2000

T-1529 de 2000

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Elder Albeiro Mesa Cano Vs. Corporacion Educativa Nueva Gente Coringe Y Otro

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Igualdad. Persona Que Aunque Aparece En La Parte Motiva No Aparece En La Parte Resolutiva De La Sentencia. Omision De Fallo Respecto Del Actor. 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.

Derecho A La Igualdad
  • Omisión del juzgado en excluir el nombre del actor en la parte resolutiva del fallo
Derecho De Acceso A La Administración De Justicia
  • Omisión del juzgado al excluir el nombre del actor en la parte resolutiva del fallo
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 (4 points)
  1. Primero. REVÓCASE el fallo proferido por en Juzgado
  2. Primero. Civil del Circuito de Medellín, dentro del proceso de tutela instaurado por Elder Albeiro Mesa Cano, en contra de la Corporación Educativa Nueva Gente -Coringe- y el Departamento de Antioquia, de conformidad con la parte motiva de esta providencia. En consecuencia, ORDÉNASE remitir copia original del expediente al Juzgado
  3. Sexto. Civil del Circuito de Medellín, para que si aún no lo hubiere hecho, proceda a fallar en favor o en contra del señor Elder Albeiro Mesa Cano, teniendo en cuenta las pretensiones de su demanda.
  4. Segundo. Por Secretaría General, LÍBRENSE las comunicaciones a que se refiere 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.

Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.