JUDr. Erik Kačmár

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Trenčín, we register 2,669 hearings and 1,686 judgements.
  1. The judge has been nominated to function for about 10 years.

Close persons acknowledged in property declarations in years 2014, 2013, and 2012.

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2014:

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2013:

Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2012:

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 1041 days in the period and was assigned on average 19 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 22.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 269 – 284. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 9 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 13.5 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 70.5% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 183
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 129

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 9.8% 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%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 298.5 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 193 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 141 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 73.1% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 165% 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 613 days in the period and was assigned on average 25 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 15.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 601 – 622. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 3 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 12.5 out of 25 points

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 51.9% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 79
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 41

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 6.8% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 3.3% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 372 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 570 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 250 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 43.9% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 106.5% 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 2013:

Sudcovi bola prideľovaná najmä Občiansko–právna agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Občiansko–právnej agende.

The judge in this period worked 198 days and on average was assigned 314 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Quality indicators

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

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 391 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 284 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 161 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 34,8% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 42,6% 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.

  • 2013 – 03.–04.10.2013 Školenie sudcov z obvodu KS v Trenčíne z občiansko–právneho, obchodného a správneho úseku, 12.11.2013 Ingerencia súdov do súkromnoprávnych zmlúv; Zásahy súdov do kontraktačného procesu
  • 2013 – 03.–04.10.2013 Školenie sudcov z obvodu KS v Trenčíne z občiansko–právneho, obchodného a správneho úseku, 12.11.2013 Ingerencia súdov do súkromnoprávnych zmlúv; Zásahy súdov do kontraktačného procesu

Published judgements

  1. Uznesenie – Starostlivosť o maloletých Judgement was issued on

  2. Uznesenie – Starostlivosť o maloletých Judgement was issued on

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

  4. Uznesenie – Bezpodielové spoluvlastníctvo manželov
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  7. Rozsudok – Bezpodielové spoluvlastníctvo manželov
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

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

  10. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

More judgements

Upcoming hearings

  1. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, o upravu rodičovských práv a… Hearing will be held on

  2. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, Návrh na zvýšenie výživného na… Hearing will be held on

  3. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, PR zaplatenie 4.800,- € s… Hearing will be held on

  4. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zrušenie a vyporiadanie podiel.… Hearing will be held on

  5. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zrušenie a vyporiadanie podiel.… Hearing will be held on

  6. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, PR zaplatenie 2.798,25 € s… Hearing will be held on

  7. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, PR zaplatenie 3.642,97 € s… Hearing will be held on

  8. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zaplatenie 1.450,- € s prísl. Hearing will be held on

  9. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, Návrh na vyporiadanie BSM Hearing will be held on

  10. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, PR zaplatenie 485,51 € s prísl. Hearing will be held on

More hearings

Past hearings

  1. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, obnova konania Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, vyporiadanie BSM Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, Návrh na zvýšenie výživného na… Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, Žaloba o PR zaplatenie 312,30 €… Hearing was held on

  5. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, PR zaplatenie 1.933,11 € s… Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, vypratanie bytu Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, NÁVRH na vydanie platobného… Hearing was held on

  8. Vyhlásenie rozsudku, PR zaplatenie 4.674,30 € s prísl. Hearing was held on

  9. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zrušenie výživného na plnoleté… Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, rozvod manželstva 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.