JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)April 18, 2002

T-267 de 2002

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Jose Edilberto Martinez Pelaez Vs. Consejo De Justicia Distriatl Y Otra

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho Al Debido Proceso. Via De Hecho. Terminacion Unilateral Contrato De Arrendamiento. Restitucion Bienes De Uso Fiscal. Coliseo Cubierto El Campin. Alcaldia Local De Teusaquillo. Falta De Competencia Coinverpro Ltda. 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.

Acción De Tutela
  • Improcedencia para establecer irregularidad en expedición de acto administrativo
Jurisdiccion Contencioso Administrativa
  • Competencia para juzgar controversia y litigios administrativos
  • Controversias sobre restitución del Coliseo el Campín
Medio De Defensa Judicial Eficaz
  • Irregularidad en expedición de acto administrativo
3 topics · 4 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. REVOCAR la sentencia proferida por el Juzgado
  2. Primero. Penal del Circuito, el 15 de febrero de 2002, en la tutela incoada por la Compania de Inversiones y Proyectos Coinverpro Ltda. contra el Alcalde Local de Teusaquillo y el Consejo de Justicia Distrital de Bogota. En consecuencia, declarar IMPROCEDENTE la mencionada accion de tutela.
  3. Librense por Secretaria, las comunicaciones de que trata el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  4. Notifiquese,
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.