JUDr. Andrej Stachovič

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Trenčín, we register 62 hearings and 20 judgements.
  2. Inactive judge at the court Okresný súd Nové Mesto nad Váhom, we register 2,792 hearings and 3,873 judgements.
  1. The judge has been nominated to function for about 15 years.

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges.

Indicators for 2021

Overall evaluation of the judge is average.
Incoming cases for the judge in 2021 were mostly from civil agenda. Judge's decrees in 2021 were mostly from civil agenda.

Component – Quality

We register 79.53% decrees for the judge, which are confirmed by the higher court in case of an appeal. The median amongst judges is 68,9%. We register 430 decrees concerning appeals.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is better than average.

Component – Effectivity

The judge had overal appointment of cases of 90.31% in 2021. The median amongst judges is 107,9%.
Anticipated time of the judge was based on data from 2021 286 days. Median amongst judges was 224,3 days.
In 2021 the judge decided 205 cases in the observed agendas.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is worse than average.

Component – Productivity

Weighted product of the judge in 2021 was 160.663. Median amongst judges was 248,1.
For the judge we register 174 unresolved cases at the end of 2021. From those 48.85% are restant cases. Median amongst judges was 39,34% of restant cases from the total number of unresolved cases.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is average.

Overall Evaluation
Evaluation on a scale from 0 to 10.

Indicators for 2017

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 0
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 0

The judge was mostly assigned to Civil agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Civil agenda.

The judge worked 1442 days in the period and was assigned on average 52 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 26 from 40 possible points and ranked on 113 – 132. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 13.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 12.5 out of 25 points

Chart Comparison

Legend
Advanced Comparison
The chart is most useful for comparisons of judges at the same or similar courts, and those who decide cases in the same or similar agenda. Specific courts and agendas have an impact on the overall performance of judges. Simply put, commercial judge from Bratislava and criminal judge from Rožňava decide uncomparable cases.

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 84.4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 302
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 255

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 9.1% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.4% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 247.7 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 228 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 123 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 53.9% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 112% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.

Indicators for 2015

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 0
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 0

The judge was mostly assigned to Civil agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Civil agenda.

The judge worked 1018 days in the period and was assigned on average 43 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 24.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 238 – 261. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 13.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 11 out of 25 points

Chart Comparison

Legend
Advanced Comparison
The chart is most useful for comparisons of judges at the same or similar courts, and those who decide cases in the same or similar agenda. Specific courts and agendas have an impact on the overall performance of judges. Simply put, commercial judge from Bratislava and criminal judge from Rožňava decide uncomparable cases.

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 88% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 208
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 183

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 8.5% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 379 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 630 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 234 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 37.1% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 91.1% of assigned cases. Average was 97.1%.

Indicators for 2013

The number of Constitutional court judgements against the judges – issued 0 and delays prior to case assignment 0.

For the judge we register performance data for years 2011 – 2013:

Sudcovi bola prideľovaná najmä Občiansko–právna agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Občiansko–právnej agende.

The judge in this period worked 595 days and on average was assigned 207 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Chart Comparison

Legend
Advanced Comparison
The chart is most useful for comparisons of judges at the same or similar courts, and those who decide cases in the same or similar agenda. Specific courts and agendas have an impact on the overall performance of judges. Simply put, commercial judge from Bratislava and criminal judge from Rožňava decide uncomparable cases.

Quality indicators

Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 70,5% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 62,9%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 44
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 31

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 3,6% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,9%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 1,1%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 3,3%.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 351 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 470 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 223 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 42,5% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 95,7% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 19,5 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 458 – 472. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 10,25 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 9,25 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – Semináre – školenia : 4 semináre – 8 dní : Zmenky a šekové právo 4.–5.2.2013; Prehľad aktuálnej judikatúry v oblasti civilného práva 4.–5.3.2013; Cezhraničné vymáhanie civilných nárokov.... Kroměřiž 10.–11.10.13; Celokrajské školenie sudcov 3.–4.10.2013
  • 2012 – semináre organizované JA SR – 5 seminárov t.j. 8 dní: Spory o vlastnícke právo k nehnuteľnostiam a kataster nehnuteľností (18.–19.06.2012); Konkurzné právo, cezhraničný konkurz, reštrukturalizácia (23.04.2012); Prehľad aktuálnej judikatúry v obchodnom práve (12.–13.04.2012); Aktuálna rozhodovacia činnosť SD EÚ k aplikácii uniového práva a prejudicionálneho konania podľa Lisabonskej zmluvy (30.01.2012); Obmedzenie osobnej slobody – zadržanie a väzba (19.–20.01.2012).
  • 2011 – semináre organizované JA SR – 7 seminárov, t.j. 15 dní: Zmenkové a šekové právo, práva vyplývajúce z vystavenia zmenky, šeku (21.–22.2.2011), Aplikačné problémy Osp , predbežné opatrenia, kontradiktórnosť civilného procesu (22.3.2011), Anglický jazyk, právnická terminológia (23.–25.3.2011), Postavenie sudcu a organizácia súdnej moci z pohľadu judikatúry ESĽP, ÚS ČR a ÚS SR (13.–14.6.2011), Anglický jazyk, právnická terminológia (25.–27.8.2011), Anglický jazyk, právnická terminológia (19.–21.10.2011), Katastrálne konanie – súdny prieskum (11.11.2011), Rozšírené občianskoprávne kolégium KS TN (13.4.2011), Školenie KS TN pre sudcov občianskoprávnej agendy (11.–12.10.2011); 2012 – semináre organizované JA SR – 5 seminárov t.j. 8 dní: Spory o vlastnícke právo k nehnuteľnostiam a kataster nehnuteľností (18.–19.06.2012); Konkurzné právo, cezhraničný konkurz, reštrukturalizácia (23.04.2012); Prehľad aktuálnej judikatúry v obchodnom práve (12.–13.04.2012); Aktuálna rozhodovacia činnosť SD EÚ k aplikácii uniového práva a prejudicionálneho konania podľa Lisabonskej zmluvy (30.01.2012); Obmedzenie osobnej slobody – zadržanie a väzba (19.–20.01.2012). ; 2013 – Semináre – školenia : 4 semináre – 8 dní : Zmenky a šekové právo 4.–5.2.2013; Prehľad aktuálnej judikatúry v oblasti civilného práva 4.–5.3.2013; Cezhraničné vymáhanie civilných nárokov.... Kroměřiž 10.–11.10.13; Celokrajské školenie sudcov 3.–4.10.2013
  • 2011 – semináre organizované JA SR – 7 seminárov, t.j. 15 dní: Zmenkové a šekové právo, práva vyplývajúce z vystavenia zmenky, šeku (21.–22.2.2011), Aplikačné problémy Osp , predbežné opatrenia, kontradiktórnosť civilného procesu (22.3.2011), Anglický jazyk, právnická terminológia (23.–25.3.2011), Postavenie sudcu a organizácia súdnej moci z pohľadu judikatúry ESĽP, ÚS ČR a ÚS SR (13.–14.6.2011), Anglický jazyk, právnická terminológia (25.–27.8.2011), Anglický jazyk, právnická terminológia (19.–21.10.2011), Katastrálne konanie – súdny prieskum (11.11.2011), Rozšírené občianskoprávne kolégium KS TN (13.4.2011), Školenie KS TN pre sudcov občianskoprávnej agendy (11.–12.10.2011)

Published judgements

  1. Trestný rozkaz – Iné práva a slobody
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  2. Trestný rozkaz – Majetok
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  3. Rozsudok – Rodina a mládež
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Trestný rozkaz – Poriadok vo verejných veciach
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  6. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  7. Rozsudok – Spotrebiteľské zmluvy
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  8. Rozsudok – Poistenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  9. Rozsudok – Spotrebiteľské zmluvy
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  10. Rozsudok – Spotrebiteľské zmluvy
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

More judgements

Upcoming hearings

We do not register any upcoming hearings for the judge yet.

Past hearings

  1. Verejné zasadnutie s rozhodnutím, Obžaloba Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 2755,23 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, Žaloba o určenie neplatnosti… Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zriadenie vecného bremena + NO Hearing was held on

  5. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, Žaloba na zrušenie a… Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, žaloba o zrušenie a… Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o nahradenie prejavu vôle Hearing was held on

  8. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, náhrada mzdy Hearing was held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, Návrh na vyporiadanie… Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, vyporiadanie BSM Hearing was held on

More hearings

Information regarding the court were obtained from the judge list, which was most recently updated on . The information may have been additionally supplemented by the data retrieved from property declarations and statistical reports.