Tutela ruling (T)August 8, 2002

T-639 de 2002

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

Reporting justice Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra

✓Claimant Matilde Garcia Cuellar Vs. Fuerzas Militares De Colombia Ejercito Nacional

✓

Topic · hard data

Decreto 01 De 1984. Art. 44 Inc. 4. Codigo Contencioso Administrativo. Deber Y Forma De Notificacion Personal. Actos De Inscripcion De Registros Publicos Y Certificacion. Principio De Publicidad. Actuacion Administrativa De Interes Particular. Accion De N

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.

Acción De Tutela

Carencia actual de objeto

1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index

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.

PRIMERO. CONFIRMAR la sentencia objeto de revisión, pero por las razones expuestas en el presente fallo.
SEGUNDO. El juzgador de primera instancia dará cumplimiento a lo ordenado en el artículo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991.

Verbatim text · source: operative part of the ruling

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.

Appears in the rulingN1 · hard data

✓

Marco Gerardo Monroy Cabra

Eduardo Montealegre Lynett

Magistrado

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

Cites1

T-682/01Derecho A La Libre Circulacion Y Proteccion Especial A Disminuidos Fisicos. Carencia Actual De Objeto Al No Existir Relacion Entre Accionante Y Accionado. Negada.

Cited by0

No decision cites it yet.

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.