JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)May 20, 2009

T-357 de 2009

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

Reporting justice Gabriel Eduardo Mendoza Martelo

✓Claimant David Suarez Torres·Respondent Juzgado Promiscuo De Familia Del Circuito De Honda

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.

Accion De Tutela Contra Juzgado Por No Expedicion De Copia De Sentencia
  • Caso en que existe hecho superado por cuanto el expediente fue encontrado en el archivo y se expidió la copia solicitada
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Derecho de peticion conculcado por el despacho demandado al omitir la entrega de copia de un expediente solicitada por el accionante. <br>en vista de que ceso la situacion omisiva generadora de la vulneracion, es decir, se satisfizo la solicitud del petente, se puso en evidencia la ocurrencia de un hecho superado. <br>

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. REVOCAR la sentencia de 15 de diciembre de 2008 proferida por la Sala Civil, Familia del Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Ibague dentro de la accion de tutela instaurada por el ciudadano David Suarez Torres contra el Juzgado Promiscuo de Familia del Circuito de Honda, por las razones expuestas en esta providencia y, en su lugar, DECLARAR la carencia actual de objeto, por existir un hecho superado.
  2. SEGUNDO. LIBRENSE las comunicaciones de que trata el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991, para los efectos alli 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
Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.