JUDr. Miroslava Maláriková

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Trnava, we register 3,456 hearings and 3,168 judgements.
  1. The judge has been nominated to function for about 16 years.

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges.

Indicators for 2017

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 3
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 1

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

The judge worked 1438 days in the period and was assigned on average 49 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 26.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 99 – 112. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 10.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 16 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 75% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 296
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 222

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 9.6% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2.4% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 286.2 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 287 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 186 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 64.8% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 191.6% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.

Indicators for 2015

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 3
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 1

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

The judge worked 1027 days in the period and was assigned on average 40 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 19 from 40 possible points and ranked on 492 – 506. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 9 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 10 out of 25 points

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 73.1% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 227
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 166

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 10.5% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.3%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2.8% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 389 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 619 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 166 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 26.8% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 76.5% of assigned cases. Average was 97.1%.

Indicators for 2013

The number of Constitutional court judgements against the judges – issued 2 and delays prior to case assignment 1.

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 636 days and on average was assigned 174 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Quality indicators

Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 65,2% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 62,9%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 112
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 73

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 10,5% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,9%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 3,7%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 3,3%.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 228 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 333 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 97 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 25% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 89,3% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 22 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 318 – 330. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 7 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 15 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – 22.–23.5.2013 –2 dni – Právny styk s cudzinou v kontexte komunitárnych nariadení o doručovaní súdnych a mimosúdnych písomností – poslucháč 5.–7.6.2013 – 3 dní – Celokrajové školenie sudcov z obvodu KS v TT – poslucháč
  • 2012 – 23.–25.5. 3 dni Celokrajové školenie sudcov z obvodu KS v TT poslucháč 21.–23.11. 3 dni Určenie medzinárodne príslušného súdu; Určenie rozhodného práva .... poslucháč
  • 2011 – 25.–27.5 – 3 dni – Celokrajové školenie sudcov obvodu KS v TT – poslucháč; 2012 – 23.–25.5. 3 dni Celokrajové školenie sudcov z obvodu KS v TT poslucháč 21.–23.11. 3 dni Určenie medzinárodne príslušného súdu; Určenie rozhodného práva .... poslucháč ; 2013 – 22.–23.5.2013 –2 dni – Právny styk s cudzinou v kontexte komunitárnych nariadení o doručovaní súdnych a mimosúdnych písomností – poslucháč 5.–7.6.2013 – 3 dní – Celokrajové školenie sudcov z obvodu KS v TT – poslucháč
  • 2011 – 25.–27.5 – 3 dni – Celokrajové školenie sudcov obvodu KS v TT – poslucháč

Published judgements

  1. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  3. Rozsudok – Starostlivosť o maloletých
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

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

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

  7. Rozsudok – Rozvod
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

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

  10. Rozsudok – Starostlivosť o maloletých
    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, o zaplatenie 956,66 € s prísl Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, rozvod manželstva a ÚPP Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, určenie vlastníckeho práva k… Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, rozvod manželstva a ÚPP Hearing was held on

  5. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 10.761,85 € s… Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, NO + určenie výživného pre… Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 7.671.68 EUR s… Hearing was held on

  8. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, náhrada škody na zdraví Hearing was held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, vydanie PR o zaplatenie 250,-… Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zaplatenie 39.597,- € 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.