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:
Overall evaluation of the judge is excellent.
Incoming cases for the judge in 2021 were mostly from civil agenda. Judge's decrees in 2021 were mostly from civil agenda.
We register 66.19% 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 278 decrees concerning appeals.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is average.
The judge had overal appointment of cases of 124.25% in 2021. The median amongst judges is 107,9%.
Anticipated time of the judge was based on data from 2021 196 days. Median amongst judges was 224,3 days.
In 2021 the judge decided 415 cases in the observed agendas.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is better than average.
Weighted product of the judge in 2021 was 415. Median amongst judges was 248,1.
For the judge we register 218 unresolved cases at the end of 2021. From those 29.36% 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 better than average.
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 967 days in the period and was assigned on average 57 cases per 100 days in main agendas.
In 2015, the judge received in total 26 from 40 possible points and ranked on 168 – 193. place of 738 evaluated judges.
The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 62.7% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.1%.
An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 7.4% 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%.
Estimated average length of proceedings is 173 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.
The judge had 416 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.
The judge had 48 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 11.5% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.
In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 108.6% of assigned cases. Average was 97.1%.
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 agenda Starostlivosti o maloletých. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v agende Starostlivosti o maloletých.
The judge in this period worked 607 days and on average was assigned 136 cases in 10 days in main agendas.
Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 64,8% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 65,5%.
Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 10,5% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 7,2%.
Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 3,7%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 2,5%.
Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 198 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.
Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 163 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.
Sudca mal na konci roka 58 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 30,5% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.
Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 110,3% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.
Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 24 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 203 – 218. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 6,5 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 17,5 z 25.
Notes about the data obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.
We do not register any upcoming hearings for the judge yet.
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.