The procedural budget of conciliation in Colombia in the means of direct reparation control: An analysis from the beginning of effective judicial protection
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25057/2500672X.1267Keywords:
effective judicial protection, procedural budget, extrajudicial conciliation, state responsibility, control medium, direct repairAbstract
The conciliation procedural budget was created to fulfill some state purposes. However, like any legal institution, it is important to analyze its social impact, its interaction with other regulations and its interrelation in the legal universe with constitutional rights and guarantees, in this case, in litigation that is processed through the means of control of reparation. direct. Consequently, it will begin by stating the reasons that gave rise to the origin of this procedural requirement, the conflicts that attend to the jurisdiction of the contentious administrative will be analyzed, a conceptual approach to extrajudicial conciliation will be carried out, at the beginning of effective judicial protection, right of action and means of control (with emphasis on direct reparation). The foregoing, taking into account that these institutions are the ones that concur and interact at the time that citizens come to demand reparation (compensation) before the jurisdiction for the unlawful damage allegedly suffered by omission or at the hands of the State.
Downloads
Languages:
esReferences
Asamblea General de las Naciones Unidas. (1948). Declaracion Universal de los Derechos Humanos. París: ONU.
Aristóteles. (2000). La politica. Bogotá: Panamericana Editorial.Colombia.
Asamblea Nacional Constituyente. (1991). Constitución Política de Colombia. Bogotá: Gaceta Constitucional No. 127 de 10 de octubre de 1991.
Correa y Fernández. El presupuesto procesal de la conciliación en Colombia...Nuevo Derecho, Vol. 16, No. 26, enero - junio de 2020, pp. 1-16. ISSNe: 2500-672X. Envigado–Colombia15
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (1991). Ley 23 de 1991. Bogotá: Diario oficial 39752 de 21 de marzo de1991.
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (1993). Ley 80. Bogotá: Diario oficial 41094 de 28 de octubre de 1993.
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (1998). Ley 446. Bogotá: Diario oficial 43.335 de 8 de julio de 1998.
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (2001). Ley 640. Bogotá: Diario oficial 44.303 de 24 de enero de 2001.
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (2009). Ley 1285. Bogotá: Diario oficial 47.240 de 22 de enero de 2009.
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (2010). Ley 1395. Bogotá: Diario oficial 47.768 de 12 de julio de 2010.
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (2011). Ley 1437. Bogotá: Diario oficial 47.956 de 18 de enero de 2011.
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (2012a). Ley 1563. Bogotá: Diario oficial 48489 de 12 de julio de 2012.
Colombia. Congreso de la República. (2012b). Ley 1564. Bogotá: Diario oficial 48489 de 12 de julio de 2012.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (1992). Sentencia T-594. Magistrado Ponente: Jose Gregorio Hernandez Galindo. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (1996). Sentencia C-037. Magistrado Ponente: Hernando Herrera Vergara. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (1999). Sentencia C-160. Magistrado Ponente: Antonio Barrera Carbonell. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (2001a). Sentencia C-893. Magistrado Ponente: Clara Inés Vargas Hernandéz. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (2001b). Sentencia C-1195. Magistrado Ponente: Dr. Manuel Jose Cepeda Espinosa. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (2001c). Sentencia C-710. Magistrado Ponente: Jaime Córdoba Triviño. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (2002a). Sentencia C-426. Magistrado Ponente: Rodrigo Escobar Gil. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (2002b). Sentencia C-454. Magistrado Ponente: Alfredo Beltran Sierra. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (2011). Sentencia C-644. Magistrado Ponente: Jorge Ivan Palacio Palacio. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Colombia. Corte Constitucional. (2016). Sentencia C-086. Magistrado Ponente: Jorge Ivan Palacio Palacio. Bogotá: Corte Constitucional.
Correa y Fernández. El presupuesto procesal de la conciliación en Colombia...Nuevo Derecho, Vol. 16, No. 26, enero - junio de 2020, pp. 1-16. ISSNe: 2500-672X. Envigado–Colombia16
Colombia. Presidencia de la República de Colombia. (1991). Decreto 2651. Bogotá: Diario oficial 40177 de 25 de noviembre de 1991.
Colombia. Presidencia de la República de Colombia. (1998). Decreto 2511. Bogotá: Diario oficial 43451 de 15 de diciembre de 1998.
Colombia. Presidencia de la República de Colombia. (2000). Decreto 1214. Bogotá: Diario oficial 44069 de 5 de julio de 2000.
Colombia. Presidencia de la República de Colombia. (2009). Decreto 1716. Bogotá: Diario oficial 47349 de 14 de mayo de 2009.
Colombia. Presidencia de la República de Colombia. (2015). Decreto 1069. Bogotá: Diario oficial 49523 de 26 de mayo de 2015.
Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja. (1907). Convencion de la Haya IV: Relativa a las leyes y costumbres de la guerra terrestre. Países Bajos. Recuperado de https://www.icrc.org/es/doc/resources/documents/misc/treaty-1907-hague-convention-4-5tdm34.htm
Gamboa, J. O. (2017). Compendio de Derecho Administrativo. Bogotá: Universidad Externado de Colombia.
Hincapié, J. A. (2013). Derecho procesal administrativo. Medellín: Librería Jurídica Sánchez R.
Jaramillo, C. B. (2013). Derecho procesal administrativo. Medellín: Señal Editora.
López, J. G. (2012). Los presupuestos procesales en el Derecho procesal Administrativo. Mede-llín: Librería Jurídica Sánchez R.
Muñoz, C. E. (2014). El procedimiento del medio de control de reparacion directa. Ediciones doctrina y ley.
Real Academia Espanola. (2019). Conflicto. En Diccionario de la lengua española. Recuperado de https://dle.rae.es/conflicto?m=form
Downloads
Published
Versions
- 2022-05-16 (4)
- 2022-05-16 (3)
- 2020-07-27 (2)
- 2020-07-27 (1)
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Nuevo Derecho
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors should declare that the article is an original work that has not been totally or partially published in any print or electronic media, which has not been submitted simultaneously to another publication and that is not currently under evaluation in another publication. On the other hand, I leave (we) evidence that the statements made therein are the sole responsibility of the / the authors / is.
All data and references to already published material are properly identified with their respective credit and included in the bibliographical notes and appointments that stand out as such and, in cases that require it, I have the proper authorizations for those with the respective rights; in case of any dispute or claim relating to intellectual property rights, we take responsibility exonerating responsibility to Nuevo Derecho.
If the article is approved for publication, the authors transfer the copyright to the journal New law to publish, distribute electronic copies and included in indexing services, directories or databases of national and international data on Open Access under the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution-Noncommercial (CC bY-NC-SA) by which the authors retain their copyrights and allow them to others copy and distribute your work provided they recognize the corresponding authorship and the work is not used for purposes commercial.
Therefore, new law does not retain the rights to reproduce or copy (copyright), so the authors will have the final versions, to disseminate them in institutional repositories, personal blogs or any other electronic or print media, with the sole condition to make mention of the original source of publication, in this case Nuevo Derecho.
| Article metrics | |
|---|---|
| Abstract views | |
| Galley vies | |
| PDF Views | |
| HTML views | |
| Other views | |
