JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)May 4, 2001

T-453 de 2001

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

Reporting justice Rodrigo Escobar Gil

✓Claimant Cecilia Mercedes De Adreis Y Otros Vs. La Nacion. El Ministerio De Hacienda Y Otros

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Igualdad. Salario Vital Y Movil.Solicitud Incremento Salarial Para Servidores Publicos En El Año 2000. Improcedencia De La Tutela Para Sustituir Al Gobierno Nacional En Su Gestion De Formular Y Aplicar La Politica Fiscal Del Estado- Negada.
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 Transitoria
  • Improcedencia incremento salarial para servidores públicos
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 (4 points)
  1. PRIMERO. REVOCAR la sentencia proferida por el Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Santa Marta, Sala de Conjueces Civil Familia en la acción de tutela T-348758 de Cecilia Mercedes De Andreis Ramírez. En consecuencia, DENEGAR la tutela concedida en el referido proceso.
  2. SEGUNDO. REVOCAR el fallo de tutela del expediente T-394627, en la acción de tutela de Héctor William Armero Castro y otros, proferido por el Juzgado
  3. Segundo. Penal del Circuito Ad-hoc de Pasto, y en su lugar CONFIRMAR el fallo proferido por el Juzgado Promiscuo Municipal de Yacuanquer, Nariño que DENEGÓ el amparo solicitado.
  4. TERCERO. Por Secretaría, LÍBRESE la comunicación de que trata 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.