JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)April 23, 1993

T-156 de 1993

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

Reporting justice Carlos Gaviria Díaz

✓Claimant Daniel Hernandez Y Otro

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho De Peticion. Establecimientos Comerciales Que Funcionan Sin Requisitos. Espacio Publico. Calle 106. 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.

5 topics · 3 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 (5 points)
  1. PRIMERO. Confirmar lo resuelto en primera y segunda instancia, tutelando el derecho de peticion de los actores Daniel Hernandez Rojas y Jose Albendea Pabon, en consecuencia de lo cual, se ordena al senor Alcalde Local de Usaquen continuar las actuaciones administrativas informadas a la Corte e iniciar todas aquellas que sean precisas para la aplicacion de las normas urbanas vigentes en su jurisdiccion.
  2. SEGUNDO. Aclarase que la tutela del derecho de peticion de los actores, se extiende a lo relacionado con el area comprendida entre las calles 102 y 109, la Transversal 10a.(Linea del ferrocarril) y la Autopista Norte.
  3. TERCERO. Sera responsable del cabal y correcto cumplimiento de esta providencia el senor Alcalde Local de Usaquen, advirtiendosele que en caso de incurrir en omisiones como las que obligaron a la presente tutela, se aplicaran las sanciones senaladas en el Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  4. CUARTO. Librese la comunicacion a que se refiere el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  5. 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.

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.