JUDr. Božena Brinčíková

  1. Active chairman at the court Okresný súd Partizánske, we register 1,552 hearings and 1,704 judgements.

Close persons acknowledged in property declarations in years 2014, 2013, 2012, and 2011.

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2014:

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2013:

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2012:

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2011:

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges.

Indicators for 2017

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

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

The judge was not assigned to any agenda dominantly. The judge mostly issued judgements in Civil agenda.

The judge worked 1374 days in the period and was assigned on average 38 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 23 from 40 possible points and ranked on 244 – 268. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 10.5 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 76.1% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 109
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 83

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 8.5% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 302 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 115 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 80 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 69.6% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 140.4% 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 did not issue judgements in any agenda dominantly..

The judge worked 960 days in the period and was assigned on average 30 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 21 from 40 possible points and ranked on 390 – 416. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 10.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 10.5 out of 25 points

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 77.9% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 66.3%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 68
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 53

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 7.4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.8%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.6% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 2.9%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 365 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 177 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 119 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 67.2% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 100% 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 556 days and on average was assigned 90 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Quality indicators

Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 69,4% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 62,9%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 36
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 25

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 8,4% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,9%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 2,6%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 3,3%.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 335 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 154 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 144 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 67% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 96,6% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 19,25 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 473 – 480. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 8,75 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 10,5 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – Vykonáva funkciu predsedu súdu
  • 2012 – Výkon funkcie predsedu súdu
  • 2012 – 18.10.2012 – 19.10.2012 – Medzinárodné právo rodinné
  • 2011 – Vykonáva funkciu predseda súdu.; 2012 – Výkon funkcie predsedu súdu; 2013 – Vykonáva funkciu predsedu súdu
  • 2011 – Vykonáva funkciu predseda súdu.
  • 2011 – 11.–12.10.2011 Školenie sudcov z obvodu KS v Trenčíne z občianskoprávneho a obchodného úseku; 2012 – 18.10.2012 – 19.10.2012 – Medzinárodné právo rodinné
  • 2011 – 11.–12.10.2011 Školenie sudcov z obvodu KS v Trenčíne z občianskoprávneho a obchodného úseku

Published judgements

  1. Uznesenie – Exekúcia a výkon rozhodnutí
    Iná povaha rozhodnutia
    Judgement was issued on

  2. Rozsudok – Starostlivosť o maloletých
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  3. Uznesenie – Exekúcia a výkon rozhodnutí
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Uznesenie – Exekúcia a výkon rozhodnutí
    Iná povaha rozhodnutia
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Uznesenie – Exekúcia a výkon rozhodnutí
    Iná povaha rozhodnutia
    Judgement was issued on

  6. Uznesenie – Exekúcia a výkon rozhodnutí
    Iná povaha rozhodnutia
    Judgement was issued on

  7. Uznesenie – Exekúcia a výkon rozhodnutí
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  8. Uznesenie – Exekúcia a výkon rozhodnutí
    Iná povaha rozhodnutia
    Judgement was issued on

  9. Rozsudok – Vyživovacie povinnosti
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

More judgements

Past hearings

  1. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, úprava styku s maloletými… Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, nariadenie výkonu rozhodnutia Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 12.871,63 € s… Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, prečin ohrozenia pod vplyvom… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Partizánske
    Judge – JUDr. Božena Brinčíková
    Defendant – ["A", "F"]
  5. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, návrh na uloženie výchovného… Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, návrh plnoletej osoby na… Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, PR - zaplatenie 424,15 € s… Hearing was held on

  8. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zvýšenie výživného Hearing was held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, rozvod manželstva s prísl. Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, návrh na uloženie výchovného… 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.