JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)May 11, 2001

T-489 de 2001

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

Reporting justice Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa

✓Claimant Fabiola Del Socorro Perea Carmona Vs. Indeportes Antioquia Y Seguros Bolivar

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Salud Por Conexidad Con La Vida. No Se Realiza Tratamiento De Desintoxicacion Por Mercurio. Inminencia De Un Perjuicio Irremediable. Prueba Empirica Y Vulneracion De Un Derecho Fundamental.Carencia Actual De Objeto. 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.

Derecho A La Salud
  • Enfermedad profesional por contaminación con mercurio
Acción De Tutela
  • Carencia actual de objeto
Juez De Tutela
  • Necesidad de practicar pruebas
4 topics · 3 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 (6 points)
  1. R E S U E L V E
  2. Primero. REVOCAR la sentencia del veintiséis (26) de septiembre de dos mil (2000), proferida por la Sala Especial de Decisión Laboral del Tribunal Superior de Medellín y mediante la que se denegó la tutela solicitada.
  3. Segundo. REVOCAR la sentencia del seis (6) de septiembre de dos mil, proferida por el Juzgado
  4. Noveno. Laboral del Circuito de Medellín
  5. Tercero. DECRETAR la CARENCIA ACTUAL DE OBJETO por sustracción de materia en el proceso de tutela objeto de la presente revisión.
  6. Cuarto. Por Secretaría General, líbrense las comunicaciones 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.