JUDr. Eva Kerecmanová

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Košice okolie, we register 1,219 hearings and 1,680 judgements.

Indicators for 2017

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 2
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 1

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

The judge worked 1407 days in the period and was assigned on average 22 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 21.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 317 – 344. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 12 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 9.5 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 79.7% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 128
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 102

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 0.8% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 383.7 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 431 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 299 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 69.4% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 127.3% 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 1048 days in the period and was assigned on average 22 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 26 from 40 possible points and ranked on 168 – 193. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 12 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 14 out of 25 points

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 79.3% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 92
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 73

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 4.2% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 0.9% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 288 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 556 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 287 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 51.6% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 102.9% of assigned cases. Average was 97.1%.

Indicators for 2013

Published judgements

  1. Uznesenie – Ostatné
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  2. Rozsudok – Ostatné
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  3. Rozsudok – Ostatné
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Rozsudok – Ostatné
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Rozsudok – Ostatné
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  6. Rozsudok – Ostatné
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  7. Uznesenie – Ostatné
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

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

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

More judgements

Upcoming hearings

  1. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 5.100,- eur s… Hearing will be held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, vyporiadanie bezpodielového… Hearing will be held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, Určenie otcovstva, úprava… Hearing will be held on

  4. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, určenie otcovstva a úprava… Hearing will be held on

  5. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 179,96 eur s… Hearing will be held on

  6. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 71,17 eur s… Hearing will be held on

  7. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 49,80 eur s… Hearing will be held on

  8. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o náhradu škody Hearing will be held on

More hearings

Past hearings

  1. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 4 128,00 € s… Hearing was held on

  2. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 2,00 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  3. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 126,86 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  4. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 196,10 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  5. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 60,60 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o určenie, že nehnuteľnosti… Hearing was held on

  7. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 60,90 eura s… Hearing was held on

  8. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zaplatenie 60,90 eura s… Hearing was held on

  9. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zrušenie bezpodielového… Hearing was held on

  10. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, o zrušenie bezpodielového… 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.