Overall evaluation of the judge is below average.
Incoming cases for the judge in 2021 were mostly from civil agenda. Judge's decrees in 2021 were mostly from civil agenda.
We register 53.78% 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 238 decrees concerning appeals.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is worse than average.
The judge had overal appointment of cases of 101.66% in 2021. The median amongst judges is 107,9%.
Anticipated time of the judge was based on data from 2021 241 days. Median amongst judges was 224,3 days.
In 2021 the judge decided 245 cases in the observed agendas.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is average.
Weighted product of the judge in 2021 was 245. Median amongst judges was 248,1.
For the judge we register 146 unresolved cases at the end of 2021. From those 26.03% 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.
Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:
The judge was mostly assigned to Civil agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Civil agenda.
The judge worked 888 days in the period and was assigned on average 27 cases per 100 days in main agendas.
In 2017, the judge received in total 18 from 40 possible points and ranked on 478 – 505. place of 651 evaluated judges.
The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 44% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.
An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 5.2% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.
Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2.9% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.
Estimated average length of proceedings is 228 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.
The judge had 188 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.
The judge had 146 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 77.7% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.
In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 244.7% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.
Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:
The judge was mostly assigned to Civil agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Civil agenda.
The judge worked 463 days in the period and was assigned on average 42 cases per 100 days in main agendas.
In 2015, the judge received in total 13.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 663 – 667. place of 738 evaluated judges.
The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 39.4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.
An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 2.2% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.
Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.3% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.
Estimated average length of proceedings is 364 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.
The judge had 823 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.
The judge had 332 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 40.3% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.
In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 105.2% of assigned cases. Average was 97.1%.
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 2013:
Sudcovi bola prideľovaná najmä Občiansko–právna agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Občiansko–právnej agende.
The judge in this period worked 42 days and on average was assigned 640 cases in 10 days in main agendas.
Evidujeme menej ako 10 odvolaní o rozhodnutiach sudcu, preto dáta považujeme za nereprezentatívne.
Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 1810 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.
Informácie o nevybavených prípadoch považujeme za málo reprezentatívne a preto ich neprezentujeme.
Dáta o reštančných prípadoch považujeme za málo reprezentatívne a preto ich neprezentujeme.
Dáta o výkonnosti sudcu považujeme za málo reprezentatívne a preto ich neprezentujeme.
Dáta o kvalite a efektivite sudcu nepovažujeme za dostatočné, preto sudcu bodovo nehodnotíme.
Notes about the data obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.
We do not register any upcoming hearings for the judge yet.
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.