Close persons acknowledged in property declarations in years 2014, 2013, 2012, and 2011.
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:
Close persons acknowledged in property declaration in a year 2011:
Notes about the data obtained from annual statistical reports of judges.
We do not register any indicators for the judge yet.
Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:
The judge was mostly assigned to Civil agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Civil agenda.
The judge worked 1440 days in the period and was assigned on average 36 cases per 100 days in main agendas.
In 2017, the judge received in total 18.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 464 – 477. place of 651 evaluated judges.
The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 69.1% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.
An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 12.7% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.
Of the total number of the judge's judgements 3.9% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.
Estimated average length of proceedings is 1448.9 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.
The judge had 393 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.
The judge had 0 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 0% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.
In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 167.8% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.
Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:
The judge was mostly assigned to Civil agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Civil agenda.
The judge worked 1128 days in the period and was assigned on average 28 cases per 100 days in main agendas.
In 2015, the judge received in total 12.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 677 – 688. place of 738 evaluated judges.
The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 68.3% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.
An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 10.9% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.
Of the total number of the judge's judgements 3.5% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.
Estimated average length of proceedings is 462 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.
The judge had 511 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.
The judge had 320 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 62.6% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.
In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 71.5% of assigned cases. Average was 97.1%.
The number of Constitutional court judgements against the judges – issued 3 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 686 days and on average was assigned 145 cases in 10 days in main agendas.
Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 81,7% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 62,9%.
Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 10,8% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,9%.
Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 2%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 3,3%.
Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 487 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.
Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 462 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.
Sudca mal na konci roka 251 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 48,5% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.
Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 100,3% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.
Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 18,5 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 501 – 508. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 11,5 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 7 z 25.
Notes about the data obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.
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.