JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)March 13, 2000

T-279 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 Maria Esperanza Lopez Rendon

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho Al Minimo Vital Y Seguridad Social. Mora En El Pago De Salarios Y Demas Acreencias Laborales. 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.

Acción De Tutela
  • Procedencia excepcional pago de acreencias laborales
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. REVOCAR el fallo del Juzgado
  2. Tercero. Laboral del Circuito de Cali, proferido el 27 de septiembre de 1999, al resolver sobre la acción de tutela incoada por María Esperanza López Rendón contra el Hospital "San Juan de Dios" de Cali y, en su lugar, conceder la protección solicitada.
  3. Segundo. ORDENASE al Director del Hospital "San Juan de Dios" de Cali cancelar, en forma inmediata, todos los salarios que se le adeudan a María Esperanza López Rendón, teniendo en cuenta que las acreencias laborales son una obligación con cargo a los gastos de administración del proceso concordatario.
  4. A fin de garantizar el pago permanente de los salarios de la demandante, el Hospital "San Juan de Dios" de Cali deberá tomar las previsiones correspondientes, so pena de desacato.
  5. Tercero. Por Secretaría LÍBRESE la comunicación de que trata 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.