JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)October 23, 2003

T-994 de 2003

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

Reporting justice Manuel José Cepeda Espinosa

✓Claimant Edgar Mogollon Portilla Vs. Iss

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho A La Igualdad De Persona Invidente. Solicitud Afiliacion De Compañera Permanente Al Regimen Contributivo De Seguridad Social En Salud Como Beneficiaria. 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.

Regimen Contributivo De Seguridad Social En Salud
  • Compañera permanente del afiliado tiene derecho a ser su beneficiaria
Sistema De Seguridad Social En Salud
  • Afiliación de persona invidente como beneficiaria de su compañero permanente
2 topics · 2 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 (4 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR la Sentencia proferida por el Juzgado
  2. Primero. Penal del Circuito de Bucaramanga el cuatro (04) de marzo de 2003, en la cual se decidio negar la tutela interpuesta por Edgar Mogollon Portilla a favor de su companera permanente, Nidia Isabel Hernandez.
  3. Segundo. CONCEDER la tutela de la referencia para proteger el derecho a la igualdad. En consecuencia, ORDENAR a la E.P.S. Seguro Social que en el termino de cinco (5) dias contados a partir de la notificacion de la presente sentencia, proceda a afiliar a Nidia Isabel Hernandez en el Regimen Contributivo de la Seguridad Social en Salud como beneficiaria de su companero permanente, Edgar Mogollon Portilla.
  4. 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.