JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)September 3, 2020

T-384 de 2020

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

Reporting justice Richard Steve Ramírez Grisales

✓Claimant Maritza Soto Sanchez Y Otra·Respondent Alcaldia Municipal De Sardinata

✓
Topic · hard data
Accion De Tutela Para Solicitar Nivelacion Salarial-Improcedencia Por Incumplir Requisito De Subsidiariedad E Inmediatez Y No Acreditar Perjuicio Irremediable
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 Para Solicitar Nivelacion Salarial
  • Improcedencia por incumplir requisito de subsidiariedad e inmediatez y no acreditar perjuicio irremediable
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

En dos acciones de tutela formuladas de manera independiente se aduce que la entidad territorial demandada vulneró derechos fundamentales de las accionantes, al negarles la nivelación salarial que solicitaron por recibir una asignación básica menor a la que percibe otra empleada que ejerce un cargo de igual categoría y funciones a las que ellas desempeñan.

La Corte considera que las solicitudes de amparo resultan IMPROCEDENTES, por cuanto incumplen los requisitos de inmediatez y de subsidiariedad exigidos por el Decreto 2591 de 1991 y la jurisprudencia constitucional.

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 las sentencias proferidas el 26 de noviembre de 2019 por el Juzgado Promiscuo Municipal de Sardinata que concedieron el amparo de los derechos al trabajo y a la igualdad de las accionantes Maritza Soto Sanchez y Rubiela Omana Botello. En su lugar, declarar IMPROCEDENTES las acciones de tutela de la referencia.
  2. Segundo. LIBRAR, por la Secretaria General de la Corte Constitucional, la comunicacion de que trata el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991, para los efectos alli previstos.
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.

Separate opinions — text available1
ConcurrenceDiana Constanza Fajardo Rivera
Official text from the case-law reporter · the most valuable part of the ruling: the positions that did not carry the majority.
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.