JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)April 6, 2005

T-341 de 2005

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

Reporting justice Jaime Araujo Rentería

✓Claimant Lucila Esther Angarita Gonzalez Vs. Iss

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
  • Demostración de amenaza o vulneración de derechos fundamentales
  • Improcedencia por no demostración de amenaza o vulneración de derechos fundamentales
1 topic · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Derecho a la salud la vida y la seguridad social de afiliada beneficiaria del regimen contributivo a quien le fueron formulados medicamentos no pos que la entidad se niega a suministrar.

Solicita se odene el suministro de los medicamentos fomulados.

Justificación de la sentencia.

Desestimacion de la accion de tutela cuando no se acredita la vulneración o amenaza del derecho fundamental.

Negada

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
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.

  1. Primero. CONFIRMAR la sentencia proferida el 12 de Noviembre de 2004 por el Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Bucaramanga, Sala de Decisión Penal, que denegó la tutela en el trámite de la acción instaurada por Lucila Esther Angarita González en representación de su madre, María Dioselina González Duarte, contra el Instituto de Seguros Sociales, pero por las razones expresadas en esta sentencia.
  2. Segundo. LÍBRESE por Secretaría la comunicación de que trata el artículo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991, para los efectos allí contemplados.
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.