JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)June 10, 2004

T-590 de 2004

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

Reporting justice Rodrigo Escobar Gil

✓Claimant Diego Luis Bedoya Quintero Vs. Sisben

✓
Topic · hard data
Derechos A La Salud Vida Y Seguridad Social De Persona Con Esquizofrenia. Solicitud Nueva Evaluacion Medica Y Suministro Medicamentos Prescritos Por Medico Tratante. Participante Vinculado. Regimen Subsidiado De Salud. Debidlidad Manifiesta. Falta Capacid
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.

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 (3 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la Sentencia del veintisiete (27) de agosto de 2003, proferida por el Juzgado Doce Civil Municipal de Medellin, dentro del proceso de la accion de tutela instaurada por Diego Luis Bedoya Quintero contra el Departamento Administrativo de Planeacion Programa -SISBEN-, y en su lugar conceder la proteccion de los derechos a la salud, a la vida y a la seguridad social.
  2. Segundo. ORDENAR a la Direccion Seccional de Salud de Antioquia, que dentro de las cuarenta y ocho horas siguientes a la notificacion de esta sentencia, le autorice al senor Diego Luis Bedoya Quintero la practica de una nueva evaluacion medica en el Hospital Mental de Antioquia y asuma el costo del tratamiento que se ordene en dicha valoracion.
  3. Tercero. LIBRENSE las comunicaciones de que trata el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991, para los efectos alli contemplados.
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.