JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)August 20, 1996

T-373 de 1996

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

Reporting justice Antonio Barrera Carbonell

✓Claimant Ivan Andres Quintero Ramirez

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. A La Igualdad De Oportunidades. Der. A La Educacion. No Seleccion De Aspirante A La Fac Por Razones Economicas. 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.

Derecho A La Igualdad
  • Exigencia económica ingreso a la FAC
Igualdad De Oportunidades
  • Naturaleza
  • Solvencia económica curso de oficial
Servicio De Educacion Por El Estado
  • Personas de escasos recursos
4 topics · 5 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 (6 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la sentencia del 6 de marzo de 1996 proferida por el Juzgado
  2. Tercero. de Familia de Santafe de Bogota, la cual nego la tutela interpuesta por Ivan Andres Quintero Ramirez, contra la Direccion de Reclutamiento y Control de Reservas de la F.A.C. y, en su lugar, tutelar los derechos fundamentales a la igualdad, a la educacion y al libre desarrollo de la personalidad del peticionario.
  3. En consecuencia, la Direccion de Reclutamiento y Control de Reservas de la F.A.C., procedera a adoptar las determinaciones del caso con el fin de que se admita a Ivan Andres Quintero Ramirez en el proximo curso de oficiales de la Escuela de Aviacion Marco Fidel Suarez.
  4. Segundo. COMUNIQUESE al Juzgado
  5. Tercero. de Familia de Santafe de Bogota, para los fines senalados en el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  6. 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.