JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)November 1, 1996

T-589 de 1996

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

Reporting justice Vladimiro Naranjo Mesa

✓Claimant Maria Reina Arias De Mejia

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. A La Vida. Der. A La Igualdad. Seguridad Social. Atencion De Los Disminuidos Fisicos. Beneficencia De Cundimarca. 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.

Centro De Atencion Especializada
  • Condiciones para internación psiquiátrica
2 topics · 2 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 (5 points)
  1. en nombre del pueblo y por mandato de la Constitucion,
  2. R E S U E L V E :
  3. Primero. CONFIRMAR la Sentencia proferida por el Juzgado Decimotercero (13deg) Civil del Circuito de Santafe de Bogota D.C., negando la tutela solicitada por la senora Maria Reina Arias Mejia, por supuesta vulneracion de los derechos fundamentales a la vida, a la igualdad, a la atencion a los disminuidos fisicos y a la seguridad social, por las razones expuestas en esta sentencia.
  4. Segundo. PREVENIR a la Beneficencia de Cundinamarca para que en el futuro, continue prestando el servicio medico y asistencial a la paciente Rocio Mejia Arias, segun lo requieran su condicion de salud y el desarrollo de su enfermedad.
  5. Tercero. ORDENAR que por la Secretaria General de la Corte Constitucional, se comunique esta sentencia al Juzgado Cincuenta y Tres (53) Civil Municipal de Santafe de Bogota D.C., en la forma y para los efectos previstos en el articulo 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.