JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)December 5, 1996

T-681 de 1996

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

Reporting justice Eduardo Cifuentes Muñoz

✓Claimant Daniel Jaramillo Rivera

✓
Topic · hard data
No Expedicion De Carne Para Vinculacion Al Club Militar De Compañera Permanente De Oficial De La Policia. 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.

Derecho A La Igualdad
  • Discriminación de compañera permanente
Familia
  • No ingreso a club militar de compañera permanente
3 topics · 3 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 proferida, en segunda instancia, por el Tribunal Superior del Distrito Judicial de Santa Fe de Bogotá, Sala Penal, el 11 de julio de 1996, y la sentencia proferida, en primera instancia, por el Juzgado 38 Penal del Circuito de la misma ciudad el 4 de junio de 1996.
  2. Segundo. CONCEDER la tutela impetrada. En Consecuencia, se ordena al Director General del Club Militar, proceder, en el improrrogable término de 48 horas contadas a partir de la notificación de esta sentencia, a expedir el carné que le permita a la compañera permanente del capitán Daniel Jaramillo Rivera acceder, sin discriminación alguna, a todos los beneficios y prerrogativas brindados por esa institución pública.
  3. Tercero. LIBRENSE, por Secretaría, las comunicaciones de que trata el artículo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991, en la forma y para los efectos allí 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.