JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)June 5, 2003

T-456 de 2003

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

Reporting justice Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra

✓Claimant Edgar Alexis Vasquez Y Otros Vs. Escuela Superior De Administracion Publica Esap

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho Al Debido Proceso Y Educacion. Curso De Especializacion En Gestion Publica. Presentacion Extemporanea De Ensayo Como Requisito De Grado. Reglamento Academico. Autonomia Universitaria. Inmediatez De La Tutela. 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.

Acción De Tutela
  • Inmediatez
  • Presentación tardía para solicitar entrega trabajo de grado
  • Término razonable de presentación
Autonomía Universitaria
  • No autorización de presentación de exámenes supletorios
  • Reglamento interno
Educacion
  • Derecho-deber
3 topics · 6 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 (2 points)
  1. PRIMERO. CONFIRMAR la sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Cartagena, Sala Civil, proferida el 1º de noviembre de 2002, y, en consecuencia, negar la tutela a los derechos al debido proceso y la educación de Edgar Alexi Vásquez Contreras, Carmen Alicia Rengifo Sanguino , Benito José Acosta Vergara, Julio Iriarte Pasos, Samuel Mendoza Ballestas, Álvaro José Arias Benítez, Gustavo Barrera Viaña y Melba Mercado Cervantes.
  2. SEGUNDO. Para los efectos del artículo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991, el juzgado de origen hará las notificaciones y tomará las medidas conducentes para el cumplimiento de esta sentencia.
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.