JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)June 10, 2004

T-602 de 2004

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Rafael Vasquez Mejia Vs. Iss Medellin

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho De Peticion. Solicitud Reconocimiento Y Pago Pension De Invalidez. Respuesta De Fondo. Termino De Quince Dias Cuatro Y Seis Meses Para Resolver. Llamado A Prevencion. Ley 700 De 2001. 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.

1 topic · 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 (6 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la sentencia proferida por el Juzgado
  2. Quinto. Penal del Circuito de Medellin, el 21 de noviembre de 2003 y, en su lugar CONCEDER la tutela interpuesta por el senor Rafael Vasquez Mejia, para la proteccion del derecho fundamental de peticion.
  3. Segundo. ORDENAR al Instituto de Seguros Sociales, Seccional Medellin, que si aun no lo ha hecho, dentro de las cuarenta y ocho (48) horas siguientes a la notificacion de esta sentencia, se pronuncie de fondo sobre el reconocimiento y pago de la pension de invalidez reclamada por el demandante.
  4. Tercero. PREVENIR al Instituto de Seguros Sociales para que en el futuro se abstenga de incurrir en actuaciones que vulneran los derechos fundamentales de sus afiliados.
  5. Librense por Secretaria, las comunicaciones de que trata el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991.
  6. 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.