JUDr. Jaroslav Kanderka

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Prešov, we register 2,980 hearings and 2,835 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 Commercial agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Commercial agenda.

The judge worked 1464 days in the period and was assigned on average 109 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 – 6 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 6 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 61.3% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 66.5%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 168
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 103

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 7.3% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.5%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2.8% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 2.8%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 559.5 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 512 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 58.4% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 105.4% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.

Indicators for 2015

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 1
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 0

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

The judge worked 1024 days in the period and was assigned on average 81 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 18.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 507 – 524. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 9 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 9.5 out of 25 points

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 68.9% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 64.9%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 106
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 73

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 6.8% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.8%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2.1% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 442 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 638 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 254 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 39.8% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 92% 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 Obchodná agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Obchodnej agende.

The judge in this period worked 584 days and on average was assigned 130 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Quality indicators

Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 69,4% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 63,7%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 85
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 59

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 10,8% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 9,7%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 3,3%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 3,4%.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 606 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 314 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 221 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 63,3% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 138% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 15,75 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 607 – 613. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 8,25 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 7,5 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – od 17.4.2013 do 31.7.2013 zastavený nápad z dôvodu PN
  • 2013 – od 17.4.2013 do 31.7.2013 zastavený nápad z dôvodu PN
  • 2013 – 2
  • 2011 – 0; 2013 – 2
  • 2011 – 0

Published judgements

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

  2. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  3. Uznesenie – Spoločnosť s ručením obmedzeným
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Uznesenie – Spoločnosť s ručením obmedzeným
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Uznesenie – Obchodné spoločnosti
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  6. Uznesenie – Spoločnosť s ručením obmedzeným
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  8. Uznesenie – Spoločnosť s ručením obmedzeným
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  10. Uznesenie – Obchodné spoločnosti
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

More judgements

Upcoming hearings

  1. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 547,70 EUR s… Hearing will be held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 42.281,94 EUR s… Hearing will be held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 12246,6 Eur s… Hearing will be held on

  4. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 38 048,10 € s… Hearing will be held on

  5. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie dlžnej sumy s… Hearing will be held on

  6. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 14528,84 Eur s… Hearing will be held on

  7. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 37.467,36 Eur s… Hearing will be held on

  8. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 8000 Eur s… Hearing will be held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 204 154,56 EUR s… Hearing will be held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o neplatnosť zmluvy o prevode… Hearing will be held on

More hearings

Past hearings

  1. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie71.142,52 EUR Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o určenie popretej pohľadávky Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 59 000,- € s… Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, VEC: Žaloba o určenie… Hearing was held on

  5. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 6150 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 7 581,- Eur s… Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o vylúčenie spoločníka z… Hearing was held on

  8. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 43.415,68 € s… Hearing was held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o vydanie zmenkového… Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o vydanie zmenkového… 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.