JUDr. Viera Koscelanská

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Nitra, we register 941 hearings and 561 judgements.
  2. Inactive judge at the court Krajský súd Nitra, we register 194 hearings and no judgements.

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 87.68% 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 138 decrees concerning appeals.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is better than average.

Component – Effectivity

The judge had overal appointment of cases of 38.82% in 2021. The median amongst judges is 107,9%.
Anticipated time of the judge was based on data from 2021 1854 days. Median amongst judges was 224,3 days.
In 2021 the judge decided 59 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 58.784. Median amongst judges was 248,1.
For the judge we register 127 unresolved cases at the end of 2021. From those 31.50% 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 worse than average.

Overall Evaluation
Evaluation on a scale from 0 to 10.

Indicators for 2017

We do not register any indicators for the judge yet.

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 1113 days in the period and was assigned on average 4 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 29 from 40 possible points and ranked on 74 – 90. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 15 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 14 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 90% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 100
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 90

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 19.6% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 391 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 104 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 78 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 75% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 136.6% 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 Občiansko–právnej agende.

The judge in this period worked 651 days and on average was assigned 49 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 82,4% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 62,9%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 17
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 14

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 5,7% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,9%.

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

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 310 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 136 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 76 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 48,4% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 152,4% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 29 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 46 – 51. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 13 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 16 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – Výkon funkcie – podpredsedníčka súdu
  • 2013 – Sudca sa zúčastnil na vzdelávacích aktivitách 3x.
  • 2012 – výkon funkcie – podpredsedníčka súdu
  • 2012 – Sudca sa nezúčastnil žiadnych vzdelávacích aktivít.
  • 2011 – Výkon funkcie – podpredsedníčka súdu; 2012 – výkon funkcie – podpredsedníčka súdu; 2013 – Výkon funkcie – podpredsedníčka súdu
  • 2011 – Výkon funkcie – podpredsedníčka súdu
  • 2011 – Sudca sa zúčastnil na vzdelávacích aktivitách 1x.; 2012 – Sudca sa nezúčastnil žiadnych vzdelávacích aktivít.; 2013 – Sudca sa zúčastnil na vzdelávacích aktivitách 3x.
  • 2011 – Sudca sa zúčastnil na vzdelávacích aktivitách 1x.

Published judgements

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

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

  3. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  5. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  7. Rozsudok – Ostatné
    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. Rozsudok – Ostatné
    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, vysporiadanie bezpodielového… Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, žaloba na ochranu osobnosti a… Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, žaloba na zaplatenie istiny… Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie sumy 155,73 eur s… Hearing was held on

  5. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, vyporiadanie BSM po rozvode Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, žaloba na vysporiadanie… Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, určenie výživného pre… Hearing was held on

  8. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, vyporiadanie BSM po rozvode Hearing was held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie sumy 3.818,16 eur… Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 486,87 eur s… 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.