JUDr. Ivana Štiftová

  1. Active judge at the court Krajský súd Bratislava, we register 296 hearings and 25 judgements.
  2. Inactive judge at the court Mestský súd Bratislava II, we register 691 hearings and 674 judgements.
  1. The judge has been nominated to function for more than 18 years.

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 2021

We do not register any indicators for the judge yet.

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 841 days in the period and was assigned on average 11 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 19.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 411 – 435. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 4.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 15 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 60.7% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 89
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 54

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 9% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 3.6% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 271.4 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 116 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 72 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 62.1% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 175.3% 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 398 days in the period and was assigned on average 15 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 15.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 601 – 622. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 7.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 8 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 64.8% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 54
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 35

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 10.2% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 3.6% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 316 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 187 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 69 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 36.9% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 60.2% 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 – 2012:

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

The judge in this period worked 289 days and on average was assigned 84 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 64,2% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 62,9%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 53
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 34

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 16,8% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,9%.

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

Efficiency indicators

Pre sudcu evidujeme menej ako 20 rozhodnutí, preto jeho efektivitu nehodnotíme.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2012 – Sudca sa nezúčastnil žiadnej vzdelávacej aktivity.
  • 2012 – Sudca ma v roku 2012 v agende C zastavený nápad od 01.01.2012.
  • 2011 – sudca sa zúčastnil 1x vzdelávacej aktivity, ktorú organizovala Justičná akadémia; 2012 – Sudca sa nezúčastnil žiadnej vzdelávacej aktivity.
  • 2011 – sudca sa zúčastnil 1x vzdelávacej aktivity, ktorú organizovala Justičná akadémia
  • 2011 – sudca nemá znížený nápad; 2012 – Sudca ma v roku 2012 v agende C zastavený nápad od 01.01.2012.
  • 2011 – sudca nemá znížený nápad

Published judgements

  1. Rozsudok – Zmluvy
    Potvrdzujúce
    Judgement was issued on

  2. Uznesenie
    Zmeňujúce
    Judgement was issued on

  3. Uznesenie
    Zastavujúce odvolacie konanie
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Rozsudok – Ochrana osobnosti
    Potvrdzujúce
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Rozsudok – Zmluvy
    Zmeňujúce
    Judgement was issued on

  6. Rozsudok – Bezdôvodné obohatenie
    Potvrdzujúce
    Judgement was issued on

  7. Uznesenie
    Potvrdzujúce
    Judgement was issued on

  8. Rozsudok – Neplatnosť právnych úkonov
    Potvrdzujúce
    Judgement was issued on

  9. Rozsudok – Vlastnícke právo k nehnuteľnostiam
    Potvrdzujúce
    Judgement was issued on

  10. Rozsudok – Pracovné právo
    Potvrdzujúce
    Judgement was issued on

More judgements

Upcoming hearings

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

Past hearings

  1. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, bezdôvodné obohatenie Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, určenie neplatnosti závetu Hearing was held on

  3. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, žaloba o určenie neplatnosti… Hearing was held on

  4. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, zaplatenie 3 621,68 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  5. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, platobný rozkaz - 275 € s… Hearing was held on

  6. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie pohľadávky vo… Hearing was held on

  7. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, platobný rozkaz - 147,29 € s… Hearing was held on

  8. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, návrh na zaplatenie 5000,- € s… Hearing was held on

  9. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, platobný rozkaz - 66,86 € s… Hearing was held on

  10. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, 3 912,44 € s prísl.… 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.