JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)August 12, 1992

T-495 de 1992

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

Reporting justice Ciro Angarita Baron

✓Claimant Oscar Aragon

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho De Peticion. Aduana. Mercancia Retenida. 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.

3 topics · 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 (7 points)
  1. PRIMERO. REVOCAR la sentencia de tutela proferida por el Tribunal Superior de Aduanas, el 19 de Marzo de 1992, en el proceso iniciado por Oscar Aragon Garcia contra funcionarios de la Aduana de Bogota
  2. SEGUNDO. CONCEDER la tutela instaurada por Oscar Aragon Garcia, en los terminos establecidos en la sentencia del Juzgado
  3. Quinto. de Instruccion Penal Aduanera el 2 de Marzo de 1992, vale decir, unicamente para efectos de indemnizacion.
  4. TERCERO. ORDENAR la remision inmediata de toda la actuacion a la jurisdiccion de lo contencioso administrativo, para los efectos contemplados en el articulo 25 del Decreto 2591 de 1991
  5. CUARTO. En todos los casos similares al presente por sus hechos o circunstancias, siempre que los funcionarios publicos hayan dilatado o postergado injustificadamente la resolucion de las peticiones elevadas por los ciudadanos con perjuicio cierto para estos, la doctrina constitucional establecida en esta sentencia tendra CARACTER OBLIGATORIO para las autoridades, en los terminos del articulo 23 del Decreto 2067 de 1991.
  6. QUINTO. ORDENAR que por Secretaria se hagan las comunicaciones respectivas, en la forma y para los efectos previstos en el articulo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991.
  7. 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.