JUDr. Dana Farkašová

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Prešov, in the meantime we register no hearings and no judgements.

Indicators for 2017

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 3
  • 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 1128 days in the period and was assigned on average 36 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 12 from 40 possible points and ranked on 613 – 617. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 10.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 1.5 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 78.8% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 184
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 145

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 12% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2.5% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 677.9 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 130 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 93 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 71.5% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 34% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.

Indicators for 2015

We do not register any indicators for the judge yet.

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 532 days and on average was assigned 176 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Quality indicators

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

  • Number of appellate judgements – 35
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 22

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 5,2% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,9%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 1,9%, 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 280 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 104 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 33,4% 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 22 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 318 – 330. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 8,75 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 13,25 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – 1
  • 2012 – znížený nápad v agendách C, Cb – 1/2 nápad – rovnomernosť zaťaženia
  • 2011 – od 1.4.2011 zastavený nápad z dôvodu odchodu sudkyne na materskú dovolenku; 2012 – znížený nápad v agendách C, Cb – 1/2 nápad – rovnomernosť zaťaženia
  • 2011 – od 1.4.2011 zastavený nápad z dôvodu odchodu sudkyne na materskú dovolenku
  • 2011 – 0; 2013 – 1
  • 2011 – 0

Published judgements

We do not register any published judgements for the judge yet.

Upcoming hearings

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

Past hearings

We do not register any past 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.