JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)September 15, 1999

T-689 de 1999

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

Reporting justice Carlos Gaviria Díaz

✓Claimant Blanca Lucia Tamayo De Toll

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. A La Vida Y A La Salud. No Establecimiento De Preexistencias Por Coomeva S.A. Medicina Prepagada. Cirugia De Aneurisma. 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 Vida
  • Tratamiento de aneurisma cerebral por medicina prepagada
Empresa De Medicina Prepagada
  • Examen de ingreso completo, riguroso y previo a la vinculación del usuario
  • Tratamiento de aneurisma cerebral catalogado como preexistencia
Medio De Defensa Judicial
  • Reembolso de dineros por asunción de costos médicos
4 topics · 5 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 el fallo proferido por la Sala Penal del Tribunal Superior de Medellin, el 4 de mayo de 1999, y, en su lugar, tutelar el derecho a la vida de Blanca Lucia Tamayo de Toll.
  2. Segundo. ORDENAR a la sociedad Salud Coomeva Medicina Prepagada S.A. que a partir del momento en que tenga conocimiento de la presente providencia, asuma el tratamiento del aneurisma cerebral diagnosticado a la peticionaria en el mes de febrero del ano en curso, con cargo al contrato de medicina integral prepagada numero 02835 del 31 de octubre de 1998.
  3. Tercero. Por Secretaria, librese la comunicacion prevista en el articulo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991.
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.