JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)March 20, 2002

T-212 de 2002

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

Reporting justice Rodrigo Escobar Gil

✓Claimant Fidelia Maria Mednoza De Arias Vs. Iss Magdalena

✓
Topic · hard data
Derechos A La Salud Seguridad Social Y Vida. Solicitud Practica Examen Medico De Garganta. Deficit Presupuestal. Dilacion Injustificada. 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 Salud
  • Práctica de exámenes
1 topic · 1 subtopic · 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 (3 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la sentencia dictada por el Tribunal Superior de Distrito Judicial de Santa Marta, en la cual denegó la tutela interpuesta por Fidelia Maria Mendoza Arias contra el Instituto de Seguro Social -Seccional Magdalena, en el proceso de la referencia, y en su lugar amparar el derecho a la salud y la seguridad social, en conexidad con los derechos constitucionales fundamentales a la vida digna de la accionante.
  2. Segundo. ORDENAR al Instituto de Seguro Social -Seccional Magdalena que, si aún no lo ha hecho, dentro de las cuarenta y ocho (48) horas siguientes a la notificación de esta sentencia, proceda a disponer lo pertinente para ordenar la práctica inmediata del examen NASOFARINGOLARINGOSCOPIA formulados por el médico del I.S.S. a la accionante.
  3. Tercero. Dar cumplimiento a lo previsto en 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.

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.