JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)May 26, 2003

T-428 de 2003

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

Reporting justice Jaime Araujo Rentería

✓Claimant Orlando Valencia Martinez Vs. Coomeva

✓
Topic · hard data
Derechos A La Salud Vida E Integridad Personal. Suministro Socket Para Cambio De Protesis De Miembro Inferior Izquierdo Prescrito Por Medico Adscrito No Incluido En El Pos. Falta Capacidad Economica. Accion De Repeticion. 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 Salud
  • Cambio de prótesis
1 topic · 1 subtopic · 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 (5 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la sentencia proferida el 8 de octubre de 2002 por el Juzgado
  2. Quinto. Penal Municipal de Bogotá y en su lugar TUTELAR el derecho a la salud en conexidad con los derechos fundamentales a la vida en condiciones dignas y a la integridad personal de Orlando Valencia Martínez
  3. Segundo. ORDENAR a Coomeva E.P.S. que dentro de las cuarenta y ocho (48) horas siguientes a la notificación del fallo, entregue el socket requerido por el solicitante para el cambio en la prótesis del miembro inferior izquierdo.
  4. Tercero. AUTORIZAR a Coomeva E.P.S. que repita contra el Fosyga por los dineros gastados en el cumplimiento de este fallo.
  5. Cuarto. Por Secretaría, líbrese la comunicación prevista en el artículo 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.