Este article seeks to show the basic components of the reasoning scaffolding that justifies the application of the constitutional precedent in Colombia, based on the reconstruction of a key judgment of the Constitutional Court on this subject, T-292 of 2006. Initially, the issue to be dealt with and the state of play are contextualised. In addition to providing a brief description of the Colombian constitutional system and the use of the judicial precedent within it, the classic and current views on the binding nature of constitutionality judgments are presented. However, although the emphasis is on abstract constitutional review, some clarifications will also be provided on judgments ruling on guardianship actions. Key concepts and figures for the subject matter of this work are also outlined, such as the operation of the vertical and horizontal precedent, as well as the change of line of decision, all within the framework of Colombian constitutional case-law. Finally, it is intended to reflect on the consequences of the mandatory nature of the constitutional precedent and the role of judges vis-à-vis it, with regard to the criminalisation of the offence of prevaricate for ignorance of the precedent referred to in judgment C-335 of 2008.