JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)June 6, 2002

T-448 de 2002

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Andres Valencia Zuluaga Vs. Coosalud

✓
Topic · hard data
Derechos A La Salud Vida E Integridad Fisica. Solicitud Cirugia Ojo Derecho Por Desprendimiento De Retina No Incluida En El Pos. Sisben. 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.

Administradora Del Regimen Subsidiado
  • Cirugía ocular que no figura en el POS
Derecho A La Vida Digna
  • Alcance
  • Pérdida de la visión
Administradora De Riesgos Profesionales
  • Obligación de coordinar cirugía por desprendimiento de retina
Derecho A La Salud
  • Conexidad con la vida
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 (4 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la sentencia proferida por el Juzgado Doce Penal del Circuito de Cali, el 12 de febrero de 2002, y en su lugar CONCEDER la proteccion del derecho a la salud del senor Andres Valencia Zuluaga, en conexidad con el derecho a la vida digna y a la integridad fisica.
  2. Segundo. ORDENAR a la A.R.S. Coosalud E.S.S., coordinar con la Secretaria de Salud Publica Departamental del Valle, para que en un plazo no mayor de diez (10) dias habiles, contados a partir de la notificacion de esta providencia, realice, si aun no lo ha hecho, la cirugia requerida por el accionante.
  3. Librense por Secretaria, las comunicaciones de que trata el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  4. 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.