TIME00338

Colombia: Sentence T-959/2011 – Due to an illness that she was suffering, X.X. requested an abortion from her health care provider on the grounds that the pregnancy could endanger her life and health. She was denied the procedure. Finally, after filing a tutela, she received a caesarean section. The Constitutional Court reiterated the obligation of health care providers to refrain from imposing obstacles or unnecessary barriers to women’s access to abortion. However, it also considered that the caesarean section had resolved the issue and, as a result, declared the lawsuit inadmissible due to a lack of cause of action. Colombia: Sentence T-959/2011 – Due to an illness that she was suffering, X.X. requested an abortion from her health care provider on the grounds that the pregnancy could endanger her life and health. She was denied the procedure. Finally, after filing a tutela, she received a caesarean section. The Constitutional Court reiterated the obligation of health care providers to refrain from imposing obstacles or unnecessary barriers to women’s access to abortion. However, it also considered that the caesarean section had resolved the issue and, as a result, declared the lawsuit inadmissible due to a lack of cause of action. Colombia: Sentence T-959/2011 – Due to an illness that she was suffering, X.X. requested an abortion from her health care provider on the grounds that the pregnancy could endanger her life and health. She was denied the procedure. Finally, after filing a tutela, she received a caesarean section. The Constitutional Court reiterated the obligation of health care providers to refrain from imposing obstacles or unnecessary barriers to women’s access to abortion. However, it also considered that the caesarean section had resolved the issue and, as a result, declared the lawsuit inadmissible due to a lack of cause of action. Colombia: Sentence T-959/2011 – Due to an illness that she was suffering, X.X. requested an abortion from her health care provider on the grounds that the pregnancy could endanger her life and health. She was denied the procedure. Finally, after filing a tutela, she received a caesarean section. The Constitutional Court reiterated the obligation of health care providers to refrain from imposing obstacles or unnecessary barriers to women’s access to abortion. However, it also considered that the caesarean section had resolved the issue and, as a result, declared the lawsuit inadmissible due to a lack of cause of action. Colombia: Sentence T-959/2011 – Due to an illness that she was suffering, X.X. requested an abortion from her health care provider on the grounds that the pregnancy could endanger her life and health. She was denied the procedure. Finally, after filing a tutela, she received a caesarean section. The Constitutional Court reiterated the obligation of health care providers to refrain from imposing obstacles or unnecessary barriers to women’s access to abortion. However, it also considered that the caesarean section had resolved the issue and, as a result, declared the lawsuit inadmissible due to a lack of cause of action. Colombia: Sentence T-959/2011 – Due to an illness that she was suffering, X.X. requested an abortion from her health care provider on the grounds that the pregnancy could endanger her life and health. She was denied the procedure. Finally, after filing a tutela, she received a caesarean section. The Constitutional Court reiterated the obligation of health care providers to refrain from imposing obstacles or unnecessary barriers to women’s access to abortion. However, it also considered that the caesarean section had resolved the issue and, as a result, declared the lawsuit inadmissible due to a lack of cause of action. Colombia: Sentence T-959/2011 – Due to an illness that she was suffering, X.X. requested an abortion from her health care provider on the grounds that the pregnancy could endanger her life and health. She was denied the procedure. Finally, after filing a tutela, she received a caesarean section. The Constitutional Court reiterated the obligation of health care providers to refrain from imposing obstacles or unnecessary barriers to women’s access to abortion. However, it also considered that the caesarean section had resolved the issue and, as a result, declared the lawsuit inadmissible due to a lack of cause of action. Colombia: Sentence T-959/2011 – Due to an illness that she was suffering, X.X. requested an abortion from her health care provider on the grounds that the pregnancy could endanger her life and health. She was denied the procedure. Finally, after filing a tutela, she received a caesarean section. The Constitutional Court reiterated the obligation of health care providers to refrain from imposing obstacles or unnecessary barriers to women’s access to abortion. However, it also considered that the caesarean section had resolved the issue and, as a result, declared the lawsuit inadmissible due to a lack of cause of action.