JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)June 13, 2002

T-465 de 2002

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 Franco Roberto Guerrero Vs. Iss Nariño

✓
Topic · hard data
Derechos A La Salud Vida E Integridad Personal. Suministro Medicamentos No Incluidos En El Pos Para Tratamiento De Disfuncion Erectil. Afectacion Vida De Pareja. Nexo De Causalidad. 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
  • Conexidad con la vida
  • Vida sexual normal
  • Suministro de medicamentos recetado denominado viagra excluido del POS
Derecho A La Vida
  • Suministro de medicamento recetado denominado viagra excluido del POS
2 topics · 4 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 (3 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la sentencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala de Casación Penal, del 27 de julio de 2001, la cual negó la tutela al derecho a la salud en conexidad con la vida del señor Franco Roberto Guerrero y, en consecuencia, CONCEDERLA.
  2. Segundo. ORDENAR al Seguro Social, Seccional Nariño, que en el término de cuarenta y ocho (48) horas, posteriores a la notificación de la presente sentencia, suministre al accionante el medicamento Sildenafil 50mg, según orden del médico tratante.
  3. Tercero. 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.