JUDr. Mikuláš Géczi

  1. Inactive judge at the court Okresný súd Lučenec, we register 2,208 hearings and 2,553 judgements.

Close persons acknowledged in property declarations in years 2014 and 2013.

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2014:

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2013:

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 1538 days in the period and was assigned on average 41 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 22 from 40 possible points and ranked on 285 – 316. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 12 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 10 out of 25 points

Chart 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 82% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 161
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 132

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 7.9% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.4% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 341.5 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 131 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 103 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 78.6% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 130.8% 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 1087 days in the period and was assigned on average 35 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 33 from 40 possible points and ranked on 15 – 17. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 15 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 18 out of 25 points

Chart 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 89.5% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 95
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 85

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 6.6% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 0.7% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 210 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 351 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 87 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 24.8% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 112.1% 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 Občiansko–právna agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v agende Starostlivosti o maloletých.

The judge in this period worked 649 days and on average was assigned 88 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Chart 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

Evidujeme menej ako 10 odvolaní o rozhodnutiach sudcu, preto dáta považujeme za nereprezentatívne.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 395 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 212 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 118 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 52,4% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 68,5% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Dáta o kvalite a efektivite sudcu nepovažujeme za dostatočné, preto sudcu bodovo nehodnotíme.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2012 – Do 31.03.2012 predseda okresného súdu. Od 01.04.2012 pozastavený nápad z dôvodu preradenia na občianskoprávnu agendu do 31.05.2012. Od 02.06.2012 preložený na občianskoprávne oddelenie.
  • 2012 – 0 dní
  • 2011 – predseda okresného súdu ; 2012 – Do 31.03.2012 predseda okresného súdu. Od 01.04.2012 pozastavený nápad z dôvodu preradenia na občianskoprávnu agendu do 31.05.2012. Od 02.06.2012 preložený na občianskoprávne oddelenie.; 2013 – –––
  • 2011 – predseda okresného súdu
  • 2011 – 0; 2012 – 0 dní; 2013 – –––
  • 2011 – 0

Published judgements

  1. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  2. Opravné uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  3. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Uznesenie Judgement was issued on

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

  7. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  9. Rozsudok – Spotrebiteľské zmluvy
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  10. Uznesenie
    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. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 5 522,55 € s… Hearing was held on

  2. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, vydanie bezdôvodného… Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zaplatenie 1100,00 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zaplatenie 1 572,88 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  5. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zaplatenie 1 788,57 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, o zaplatenie 4089,32 EUR s… Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zaplatenie 10 505,01 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  8. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 5 522,55 € s… Hearing was held on

  9. Verejné vyhlásenie rozsudku, zaplatenie 3 952,10 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 800,64 € 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.