JUDr. Miroslav Toma

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Žiar nad Hronom, we register 5,323 hearings and 2,039 judgements.

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 criminal agenda. Judge's decrees in 2021 were mostly from criminal agenda.

Component – Quality

We register 61.38% 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 246 decrees concerning appeals.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is worse than average.

Component – Effectivity

The judge had overal appointment of cases of 113.79% in 2021. The median amongst judges is 107,9%.
Anticipated time of the judge was based on data from 2021 92 days. Median amongst judges was 224,3 days.
In 2021 the judge decided 330 cases in the observed agendas.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is better than average.

Component – Productivity

Weighted product of the judge in 2021 was 315.631. Median amongst judges was 248,1.
For the judge we register 80 unresolved cases at the end of 2021. From those 48.75% 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 – 1
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 0

The judge was mostly assigned to Criminal agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in translation missing: en.judges.indicators_2015.basic.decided_agenda.trestná.

The judge worked 1533 days in the period and was assigned on average 127 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 17.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 506 – 524. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 4.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 13 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 60.3% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 66%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 151
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 91

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 5.4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.7%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2.2% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 2.9%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 150 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 143 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 92 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 64.3% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 93.8% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.

Indicators for 2015

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 1
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 0

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

The judge worked 1098 days in the period and was assigned on average 95 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 19.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 467 – 491. place of 738 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 56.7% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 63.8%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 90
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 51

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 4.4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.9% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 165 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 179 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 83 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 46.4% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 95.2% 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 – 2013:

Sudcovi bola prideľovaná najmä Trestná agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Trestnej agende.

The judge in this period worked 660 days and on average was assigned 126 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 47,8% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 52,3%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 46
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 22

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 5,8% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,4%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 3%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 4%.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 237 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 176 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 66 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 36,7% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 93,8% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 21,75 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 331 – 345. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 7,25 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 14,5 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – Sudca sa nezúčstnil žiadneho vzdelávacieho seminára.
  • 2012 – Uvedený sudca sa nezúčastnil žiadneho vzdelávacieho podujatia.
  • 2011 – Uvedený sudca sa nezúčastnil žiadneho vzdelávacieho podujatia. ; 2012 – Uvedený sudca sa nezúčastnil žiadneho vzdelávacieho podujatia.; 2013 – Sudca sa nezúčstnil žiadneho vzdelávacieho seminára.
  • 2011 – Uvedený sudca sa nezúčastnil žiadneho vzdelávacieho podujatia.

Published judgements

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

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

  3. Uznesenie – Iné práva a slobody
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Trestný rozkaz – Všeobecne nebezpečné a proti…
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Trestný rozkaz – Všeobecne nebezpečné a proti…
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  6. Rozsudok – Iné práva a slobody
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  7. Rozsudok – Poriadok vo verejných veciach
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  9. Trestný rozkaz – Rodina a mládež
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  10. Trestný rozkaz – Všeobecne nebezpečné a proti…
    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. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 208 ods. 1 písm.a… Hearing was held on

  2. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 349 Tr. zák. Hearing was held on

  3. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 172 ods. 1 písm. c… Hearing was held on

  4. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 157 ods. 1, ods. 2… Hearing was held on

  5. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 221 ods. 1 ods. 3… Hearing was held on

  6. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 149 ods. 1, ods. 2… Hearing was held on

  7. Verejné zasadnutie s rozhodnutím, § 323 ods. 1 písm. a)… Hearing was held on

  8. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 245 ods. 1, ods. 3… Hearing was held on

  9. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 219 ods. 1 ods. 2 ods.… Hearing was held on

  10. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, § 208 ods. 1 písm. a… 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.