JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)April 30, 1996

T-180 de 1996

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

Reporting justice Eduardo Cifuentes Muñoz

✓Claimant Nubia Nelly Plazas

✓
Topic · hard data
Limites A La Autonomia Universitaria. Der. A La Educacion. Examenes Dejados De Presentar Por Estado De Embarazo. 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.

Autonomía Universitaria
  • Límites
  • Protección derechos del alumno
  • Finalidad
  • Actuación ilegítima
  • Reglamentación conforme a la Constitución
Derecho A La Educación
  • Aplazamiento de exámenes por embarazo
4 topics · 8 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 (2 points)
  1. PRIMERO. REVOCAR las sentencias de tutela proferidas por el Juez 28 Civil Municipal de Santa Fe de Bogota y por el Juez 20 Civil del Circuito de Santa Fe de Bogota, de octubre 2 de 1995 y noviembre 15 de 1995, respectivamente. En su lugar se CONCEDE la tutela del derecho fundamental a la educacion de la demandante. Para restablecer el derecho conculcado se ORDENA a la Universidad Libre, Seccional Bogota, disponer, en un plazo razonable, que no podra exceder de sesenta dias, la celebracion de los examenes finales dejados de presentar por la actora dada la incapacidad generada por su estado de embarazo.
  2. SEGUNDO. LIBRESE comunicacion al mencionado Juzgado, con miras a que se surta la notificacion de esta providencia, segun lo establecido en el articulo 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.

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.