JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)October 8, 2004

T-978 de 2004

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

Reporting justice Jaime Córdoba Triviño

✓Claimant Nhora Yarima Prado Tristancho Vs. Banco Colpatria

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Vida La Salud Y La Seguridad Social De Extrabajadora Del Banco A Quien Por El Incumplimiento De Las Metas Establecidas Por La Entidad Se Le Termino El Contrato Sin Habersele Practicado Una Cirugia Que Requiere. Solicita Se Ordene Al Banco Co
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.

Periodo De Prueba
  • Calificación de servicios no satisfacen al empleador desvirtuando la posible discriminación
  • Excepción al principio constitucional de la estabilidad en el empleo
  • Objeto
  • Terminación unilateral debe fundamentarse con la comprobación objetiva de la falta de competencias mínimas para el ejercicio laboral
Periodo De Prueba En Contrato De Trabajo
  • Límites constitucionales a la facultad del empleador de terminar unilateralmente el vínculo laboral
2 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.

  1. Primero. CONFIRMAR la sentencia del 12 de diciembre de 2003, proferida por el Juzgado
  2. Cuarto. Penal Municipal de San José de Cúcuta, Norte de Santander, que negó la tutela de los derechos constitucionales a la vida, la salud y la seguridad social de la ciudadana Nhora Yarima Prado Tristancho.
  3. Segundo. Por Secretaría General líbrense las comunicaciones previstas en el artículo 36 del Decreto Ley 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.