JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)September 24, 2009

T-670 de 2009

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

Reporting justice Jorge Ignacio Pretelt Chaljub

✓Claimant Carlos Augusto Rojas Reina·Respondent Hospital Federico Lleras Acosta De Ibague

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.

Acción De Tutela
  • No se puede afirmar que se hayan vulnerado los derechos fundamentales de la actora
3 topics · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Salud, vida digna.

EL actor, comenta que su representada sufre de diabetes y esta próxima a ser hospitalizada, para la amputación de una pierna, solicita se le brinde el tratamiento integral y ser exonerada de las cuotas moderadoras, ya que pese a pertenecer al SISBEN nivel 1, no tiene los medios para sufragarlas.

La Sala encuentra que no es posible constatar la vulneración de los derechos fundamentales de la actora, ya que hasta el momento en la historia clínica se observa que ha sido atendida y se le han brindado los tratamientos requeridos.

Niega.

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
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.

  1. PRIMERO. CONFIRMAR la sentencia proferida el 24 de abril de 2009 por el Juzgado
  2. Tercero. Administrativo del Circuito de Ibague.
  3. SEGUNDO. LIBRESE por Secretaria la comunicacion 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.