JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)May 9, 2002

T-351 de 2002

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

Reporting justice Alvaro Tafur Galvis

✓Claimant Yolanda Taguado Vs. Municipio De Sincelejo

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho Al Debido Proceso Y Trabajo. Cambio Actividad O Traslado Establecimiento De Comercio. Casa De Lenocidio. Conminacion. Mecanismo Ordinario De Proteccion. 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.

Jurisdiccion Contencioso Administrativa
  • Resolución de controversia sobre casos de lenocinio
Accion De Tutela Para Reintegro Al Cargo
  • Improcedencia por existir otro medio de defensa judicial y no existir perjuicio irremediable
2 topics · 2 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. en nombre del pueblo y por mandato de la Constitucion,
  2. R E S U E L V E:
  3. Primero. Confirmar las sentencias proferidas por las Salas Civiles del Tribunal Superior de Bogota y de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, el 16 de octubre y el 29 de noviembre de 2001 respectivamente, para negar la proteccion de sus derechos fundamentales de peticion y a la seguridad social, invocados por los senores Gentil Eliecer Cordoba Abadia, Josefa Maria Escorcia Negrini, Teresa Perea Mosquera, Ivan Silvano Lozano Osorio y Reyes Murillo Sanchez contra el Fondo de Prevision Social del Congreso de la Republica.
  4. Segundo. Por Secretaria librense las comunicaciones previstas 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.