JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)March 3, 2000

T-235 de 2000

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

Reporting justice José Gregorio Hernández Galindo

✓Claimant Rosmery Alarcon Nieves Y Otros

✓
Topic · hard data
Mora Del Patrono En Aportes De Seguridad Social En Salud. La Tutela Se Debio Dirigir Contra El Empleador Y No Contra El Iss. Negada Parcialmente.
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
  • Incumplimiento del empleador en trasladar recursos propios y del trabajador para seguridad social
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 (5 points)
  1. Primero. CONFIRMAR el fallo proferido por el Juzgado
  2. Primero. Penal del Circuito de Valledupar, en cuanto absolvio de toda responsabilidad al Seguro Social y, respecto, de ella declaro improcedente el amparo.
  3. SE ADICIONA el fallo de instancia, en el sentido de reconvenir al Municipio de San Diego (Cesar) para que se ponga al dia en el pago de sus deudas de seguridad social en salud, las cuales actualmente son objeto de proceso coactivo. Mientras ello sucede, el Municipio, tal como lo manda la ley, debera seguir asumiendo los gastos que genere la atencion en salud de sus empleados y pensionados.
  4. Segundo. REMITASE copia de la presente sentencia a la Fiscalia General de la Nacion, para lo de su competencia.
  5. Tercero. DESE cumplimiento a lo previsto 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.