Mgr. Marek Mikulčík

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Pezinok, we register 2,373 hearings and 1,040 judgements.
  2. Inactive judge at the court Okresný súd Prievidza, we register 594 hearings and 444 judgements.
  1. The judge has been nominated to function for more than 8 years.

Indicators for 2017

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 1
  • 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 970 days in the period and was assigned on average 43 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 19 from 40 possible points and ranked on 436 – 463. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 4.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 14.5 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 60% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 68.7%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 155
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 93

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 9.2% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 10.1%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 3.7% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3.1%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 390.4 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 292 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 240 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 82.2% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 243.8% 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 Civil agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Civil agenda.

The judge worked 531 days in the period and was assigned on average 49 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 9 from 40 possible points and ranked on 716 – 721. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 6 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 3 out of 25 points

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 59.7% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 77
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 46

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 8.7% 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%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 564 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 592 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 306 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 51.7% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 39.9% 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 2013:

Sudcovi bola prideľovaná najmä Občiansko–právna agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Občiansko–právnej agende.

The judge in this period worked 118 days and on average was assigned 270 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Quality indicators

Evidujeme menej ako 10 odvolaní o rozhodnutiach sudcu, preto dáta považujeme za nereprezentatívne.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 514 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 221 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 25 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 10,6% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 49,2% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Dáta o kvalite a efektivite sudcu nepovažujeme za dostatočné, preto sudcu bodovo nehodnotíme.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – 1. Seminár "Dedičské právo, dedičské konanie", JA SR Pezinok 23.05.2013 2. Charta základných práv EÚ–aplikácia v praxi Krakow, Poľsko–Krakow, 26.9.–27.9.2013–plne hradené ERA 3. Celokrajské školenie sudcov z obvodu KS TN, 3.–4.10.2013, Omšenie 4. Seminár "Francúzsky jazyk", 23.–25.10.2013, Omšenie 5. Seminár v Poľsku – Krakow – 28.–29.11.2013, Confirmation ERA seminar 6. Seminár "Anglický jazyk–právnická terminológia", 06.–08–11–2013, Omšenie – – všetko v postavení poslucháča
  • 2013 – 1. Seminár "Dedičské právo, dedičské konanie", JA SR Pezinok 23.05.2013 2. Charta základných práv EÚ–aplikácia v praxi Krakow, Poľsko–Krakow, 26.9.–27.9.2013–plne hradené ERA 3. Celokrajské školenie sudcov z obvodu KS TN, 3.–4.10.2013, Omšenie 4. Seminár "Francúzsky jazyk", 23.–25.10.2013, Omšenie 5. Seminár v Poľsku – Krakow – 28.–29.11.2013, Confirmation ERA seminar 6. Seminár "Anglický jazyk–právnická terminológia", 06.–08–11–2013, Omšenie – – všetko v postavení poslucháča

Published judgements

  1. Trestný rozkaz – Poriadok vo verejných veciach
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

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

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

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

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

  7. Rozsudok – Rodina a mládež
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

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

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

More judgements

Upcoming hearings

  1. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin: neoprávnený… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – X. O.
  2. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin: krádež podľa §… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – L. P.
  3. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin: krádež podľa §… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – I. X.
  4. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, pokračovací… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – L. R.
  5. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin: nedovolená… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – F. A.
  6. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, Zločin: krádež podľa §… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – Y. L.
  7. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, Prečin: ublíženie na… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – A. B.
  8. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin: výtržníctvo… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – G. X.
  9. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, prečin: zanedbanie povinnej… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – C. H.
  10. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, Zločin: týranie blízkej… Hearing will be held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – Y. S.
More hearings

Past hearings

  1. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, zločin: podvod podľa… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – F. Q.
  2. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin: zanedbanie… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – U. K.
  3. Verejné zasadnutie s rozhodnutím, prečin zanedbanie… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – C. K.
  4. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin. zanedbanie… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – V. R.
  5. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin:ohrozenie pod… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – A. H.
  6. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin zanedbanie… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – M. L.
  7. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, Rozhodovanie o… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – H. G.
  8. Verejné zasadnutie s rozhodnutím, prečin: zanedbanie… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – W. A.
  9. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin: zanedbanie… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – H. B.
  10. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin: zanedbanie… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Pezinok
    Judge – Mgr. Marek Mikulčík
    Defendant – S. Z.
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.