JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)November 21, 2000

T-1601 de 2000

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

Reporting justice Fabio Morón Díaz

✓Claimant Eduardo Cenen Torres Cely Vs. Iss Duitama

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Salud Y Seguridad Social. Prestacion Servicios Medicos. Mora En El Pago De Aportes Por Empleador. Acerias Paz Del Rio S.A. 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.

Trabajador Asalariado
  • Suspensión de la afiliación
Empleador
  • Asunción de responsabilidad por mora en aportes
  • Mora de aportes
Entidad Promotora De Salud
  • Interrupción de servicios
Sistema De Salud
  • Relaciones entre empleador y entidad de seguridad social
6 topics · 6 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. CONFIRMAR la Sentencia de fecha 2 de mayo del año 2000 dictada por el Juzgado
  2. Segundo. Penal Municipal de Duitama dentro de la acción de tutela promovida por Eduardo Cenén Torres Cely contra el ISS.
  3. Segundo. REQUERIR a la Empresa Acerías Paz del Río S.A. para que cancele, si no lo ha hecho ya, al ISS-Seccional Duitama, los aportes y cotizaciones correspondientes al trabajador EDUARDO CENEN TORRES CELY y en el entretanto asuma las obligaciones médico-asistenciales del mismo y de su núcleo familiar.
  4. Tercero. Por Secretaria general, líbrense las comunicaciones previstas en el artículo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991, para los efectos allí contemplados.
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.