Mgr. Nina Kollárová

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Poprad, we register 2,591 hearings and 1,066 judgements.
  2. Inactive judge at the court Mestský súd Bratislava I, we register 1,041 hearings and 7 judgements.
  1. The judge has been nominated to function for more than 20 years.

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges.

Indicators for 2021

Overall evaluation of the judge is below average.
Incoming cases for the judge in 2021 were mostly from civil agenda. Judge's decrees in 2021 were mostly from civil agenda.

Component – Quality

We register 64.60% decrees for the judge, which are confirmed by the higher court in case of an appeal. The median amongst judges is 68,9%. We register 161 decrees concerning appeals.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is average.

Component – Effectivity

The judge had overal appointment of cases of 52.96% in 2021. The median amongst judges is 107,9%.
Anticipated time of the judge was based on data from 2021 1014 days. Median amongst judges was 224,3 days.
In 2021 the judge decided 188 cases in the observed agendas.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is worse than average.

Component – Productivity

Weighted product of the judge in 2021 was 186.294. Median amongst judges was 248,1.
For the judge we register 428 unresolved cases at the end of 2021. From those 45.56% are restant cases. Median amongst judges was 39,34% of restant cases from the total number of unresolved cases.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is average.

Overall Evaluation
Evaluation on a scale from 0 to 10.

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 Commercial agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Commercial agenda.

The judge worked 1098 days in the period and was assigned on average 79 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 18 from 40 possible points and ranked on 478 – 505. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 6 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 12 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 62.1% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 66.5%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 58
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 36

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.5%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.5% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 2.8%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 499.6 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 219 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 169 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 77.2% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 228.6% 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 Commercial agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Commercial agenda.

The judge worked 894 days in the period and was assigned on average 68 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 13 from 40 possible points and ranked on 668 – 676. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 6 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 7 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 61.4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 64.9%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 44
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 27

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 3.4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.8%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.3% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 604 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 341 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 175 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 51.3% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 99% 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 516 days and on average was assigned 179 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

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

Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 62,1% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 63,7%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 29
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 18

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 3,4% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 9,7%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 1,3%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 3,4%.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 839 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 522 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 313 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 58,8% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 94,6% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 13,5 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 659 – 662. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 10 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 3,5 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – Seminár – 4
  • 2012 – Seminár – 12
  • 2011 – seminár – 8; 2012 – Seminár – 12; 2013 – Seminár – 4
  • 2011 – seminár – 8

Published judgements

  1. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

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

  4. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  6. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  7. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

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

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

More judgements

Upcoming hearings

  1. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 20 000,- € s… Hearing will be held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 300,- € Hearing will be held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 23.502,79 Eur s… Hearing will be held on

  4. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 18.297,36 EUR s… Hearing will be held on

  5. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 4 000,- € s… Hearing will be held on

  6. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, vysporiadanie podielového… Hearing will be held on

  7. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, vypratanie nehnuteľ. a… Hearing will be held on

  8. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o určenie vlastníckeho práva… Hearing will be held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o náhradu škody z ublíženia… Hearing will be held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o určenie vlastníckeho práva… Hearing will be held on

More hearings

Past hearings

  1. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 19 596 € s… Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 4.572,08 eur s… Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zaplatenie 261,30 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zaplatenie 574,74 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  5. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 976,18 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zaplatenie 549,48 € s… Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zrušenie BSM za trvania… Hearing was held on

  8. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, o zaplatenie 1436,83 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 23.502,79 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o nahradenie prejavu vôle -… 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.