Advice on the certificate of existence and legal representation of the Mayor of Bogotá. In that regard, it should be noted that Article 166 of the Code of Administrative Procedure and the Code of Administrative Procedure refers to the documents which must be annexed to the application in proceedings before the administrative courts, stating in paragraph 4 thereof that, in the case of legal persons governed by private law or legal persons governed by public law participating in legal persons governed by public law, Proof of existence and representation must be attached. in this process, except with regard to the nation, departments and municipalities and other institutions created by the Constitution and the law. Article 77(4) of the Code of Civil Procedure stipulates that the application must be accompanied by proof of representation of legal persons acting as plaintiffs or defendants, with the exception of the nation, ministries and municipalities. In accordance with articles 286 and 287 of the 1991 Political Constitution, is it an autonomous territorial entity for the management of its interests, with the right to govern itself from its own authorities and to exercise the corresponding competences? Article 2 of Decree-Law 1421 of 1993 provides as follows: The capital district, as a territorial unit, is subject to the political, administrative and fiscal regime expressly established for it in the Constitution, this Statute and the special laws promulgated for its organization and functioning? In the absence of the above-mentioned norms, it is subject to the constitutional and legal provisions applicable to municipalities. Bogotá, D.C., is a territorial entity whose creation derives directly from the Constitution, therefore, in accordance with Article 166 of the Code of Administrative Procedure and the Code of Administrative Procedure, it is not necessary to prove its existence and legal representation in accordance with this provision. With regard to the legal representation of Bogotá, it should be noted that article 35 of Decree-Law 1421 of 1993 stipulates that the mayor is the head of the Government and administration of the district and represents the district of the capital legally, judicially and extrajudicially in accordance with paragraph 3 of the higher article 315. The Mayor of Bogotá is the legal representative of the district and may represent other similar entities, which does not mean that the accounts debited by him should serve as general privileges of the creditors of all the legal entities he represents. He explained that according to the law, the functions of the syndic should be the representative of the municipal council, but according to article 36, it is stated that in case of prevention or refusal, the mayor may assume this function with the consent of the cabildo. From the normative point of view, there are three cases in which the mayor can take charge of the legal representation of the municipal council, in the actions and facts in which he is a party, and needs only one, previously approved by the Cabildo.

Is the (?) Code of Administrative Procedure and Administrative Jurisdiction The documents to be annexed to the action in the proceedings for which the jurisdiction of the contested administrative authority is known (?) must be accompanied by proof of the existence and representation in the case of legal persons governed by private law or persons governed by public law who are parties to the proceedings, except with regard to the nation, departments and communes. (¿) Bogotá D.C. is, according to (?) the Constitution (¿), a territorial entity with autonomy for the management of its interests, with the right to be governed by its own authorities (?) 1. The District Council, 2. The mayor. 3. Local Boards of Directors. 4. Mayors and other local authorities. 5.

The bodies created and organized by the Council at the initiative of the Mayor. (¿) does not refer to the function of the mayor, but to the mayor, being at the head of the mayor, in which (?) (¿) comply with the Constitution, the law, the decrees of the national government and the agreements of the Council of Bogotá D.C. (¿). According to ratio essendi the different jurisprudential criteria of the category: “VERFASSUNGSSTREIT. THE SOLE SYNDIC OF THE MUNICIPALITIES OF THE STATE OF VERACRUZ HAS THE PROCEDURAL LEGITIMACY TO APPEAR ON THEIR BEHALF WITHOUT THE NEED FOR ANY FORMALITY OR PRIOR SPECIAL AGREEMENT. This is also the case of the isolated thesis of voice with location data: “VERFASSUNGSSTREIT. THE LEGAL PRESUMPTION OF REPRESENTATION AND CAPACITY OF THE APPLICANTS DOES NOT APPLY IF IT FOLLOWS FROM THE ACTION THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE LOCUS STANDI. Article 11 of the Act regulating sections I and II of article 105 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, which is closely linked to article 10 of the same legal system, which designates as an actor in constitutional disputes the institution, power or body that promotes it, establishes the presumption that anyone who appears before a court on his behalf: enjoys and is able to benefit from such legal representation. unless proven otherwise. However, it must be assumed that such a presumption does not apply where it results from the assertion that those who wish to bring an action in that capacity are not entitled to bring the action on grounds of constitutional controversy, since it is reflected that that character is due to acts taken outside the applicable constitutional and legal provisions.

since, in this case, the action must be dismissed because they cannot represent the institution for lack of legitimacy – a power or body which, as plaintiffs, may foster constitutional controversy” Plenary, ninth epoch, Judicial Weekly of the Federation and its Gazette, Volume III, February nineteen ninety-six, page 166, Record Number: 200.211.