JUDr. Lenka Pavlovičová

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Trenčín, we register 154 hearings and 40 judgements.
  2. Inactive judge at the court Okresný súd Nové Mesto nad Váhom, we register 4,442 hearings and 2,969 judgements.

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:

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges.

Indicators for 2021

Overall evaluation of the judge is above average.
No agenda dominated in incoming cases for the judge during 2021. No agenda dominated in judge's decrees during 2021.

Component – Quality

We register 78.44% 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 422 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 104.32% in 2021. The median amongst judges is 107,9%.
Anticipated time of the judge was based on data from 2021 283 days. Median amongst judges was 224,3 days.
In 2021 the judge decided 362 cases in the observed agendas.
In this dimension the judge belongs to the group that is average.

Component – Productivity

Weighted product of the judge in 2021 was 319.39. Median amongst judges was 248,1.
For the judge we register 268 unresolved cases at the end of 2021. From those 50.00% 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 average.

Overall Evaluation
Evaluation on a scale from 0 to 10.

Indicators for 2017

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

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

The judge was not assigned to any agenda dominantly. The judge mostly issued judgements in translation missing: en.judges.indicators_2015.basic.decided_agenda.NA.

The judge worked 1461 days in the period and was assigned on average 146 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 21 from 40 possible points and ranked on 345 – 368. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 12 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 9 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 80.3% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 67.8%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 274
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 220

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 8.2% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 9.4%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.6% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 407.3 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 501 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 310 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 61.9% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 98.5% 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 – 1

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

The judge worked 1038 days in the period and was assigned on average 110 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 22.5 from 40 possible points and ranked on 324 – 344. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 10.5 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 12 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 78% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 64.9%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 123
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 96

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 5.5% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.8%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 1.2% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 358 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 646 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 150 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 23.2% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 83.3% of assigned cases. Average was 97.1%.

Indicators for 2013

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

For the judge we register performance data for years 2011 – 2013:

Sudcovi bola prideľovaná najmä Obchodná agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Obchodnej agende.

The judge in this period worked 627 days and on average was assigned 171 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 76% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 63,7%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 50
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 38

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 5,1% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 9,7%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 1,2%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 3,4%.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 232 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 235 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 67 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 26,5% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 80% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 26,75 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 101 – 109. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 11,25 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 15,5 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – Semináre – školenia : 6 seminárov – 10 dní : Majetkové, vecné a pozemkové práva 24.–25.1.2013; Uznávanie rozhodnutí cudzích štátov na území SR 21.2.2013; Určovacie žaloby 11.4.2013; Spory o vlastnícke právo k nehnuteľnostiam a kataster nehnuteľností 22.–23.4.2013, Celokrajské školenie sudcov 3.–4.10.2013; Aktuálna rozhodovacia činnosť špecializ. rod. senátov 02.–03.12.13
  • 2012 – semináre organizované JA SR – 6 seminárov t.j. 9 dní: Princípy vnútroštátnej aplikácie práva EÚ (12.–13.12.2012); I. Určenie medzinárodne príslušného súdu–Brusel I (44/01);Určenie rozhodného práva pre zmluvné a mimozmluvné záväzky– Rím I,II (21.–23.11.2012); Efektívne využitie počítača, internetu a právnických vyhľadávačov – 2 časť (30.10.2012); Efektívne využitie počítača, internetu a právnických vyhľadávačov – 1 časť (03.04.2012); Najnovšia judikatúra ESĽP a jej dôsledky na rozhodovaciu činnosť vnútroštátnych súdov – civilý úsek – 1. časť (31.01.2012); Aktuálna rozhodovacia činnosť SD EÚ k aplikácii úniového práva a prejudicionálneho konania podľa Lisabonskej zmluvy (30.01.2012).
  • 2011 – semináre organizované JA SR – 2 semináre, t.j. 3 dni: Vyhľadávanie a výklad práva EÚ vnútroštátnym sudcom (2.–3.3.2011), Obchodné záväzkové vzťahy – aplikačné problémy (11.5.2011); 2012 – semináre organizované JA SR – 6 seminárov t.j. 9 dní: Princípy vnútroštátnej aplikácie práva EÚ (12.–13.12.2012); I. Určenie medzinárodne príslušného súdu–Brusel I (44/01);Určenie rozhodného práva pre zmluvné a mimozmluvné záväzky– Rím I,II (21.–23.11.2012); Efektívne využitie počítača, internetu a právnických vyhľadávačov – 2 časť (30.10.2012); Efektívne využitie počítača, internetu a právnických vyhľadávačov – 1 časť (03.04.2012); Najnovšia judikatúra ESĽP a jej dôsledky na rozhodovaciu činnosť vnútroštátnych súdov – civilý úsek – 1. časť (31.01.2012); Aktuálna rozhodovacia činnosť SD EÚ k aplikácii úniového práva a prejudicionálneho konania podľa Lisabonskej zmluvy (30.01.2012). ; 2013 – Semináre – školenia : 6 seminárov – 10 dní : Majetkové, vecné a pozemkové práva 24.–25.1.2013; Uznávanie rozhodnutí cudzích štátov na území SR 21.2.2013; Určovacie žaloby 11.4.2013; Spory o vlastnícke právo k nehnuteľnostiam a kataster nehnuteľností 22.–23.4.2013, Celokrajské školenie sudcov 3.–4.10.2013; Aktuálna rozhodovacia činnosť špecializ. rod. senátov 02.–03.12.13
  • 2011 – semináre organizované JA SR – 2 semináre, t.j. 3 dni: Vyhľadávanie a výklad práva EÚ vnútroštátnym sudcom (2.–3.3.2011), Obchodné záväzkové vzťahy – aplikačné problémy (11.5.2011)

Published judgements

  1. Rozsudok bez odôvodnenia – Opatrovníctvo
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  3. Rozsudok bez odôvodnenia – Výchovné opatrenia
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Rozsudok – Zmluva o dielo
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  5. Rozsudok bez odôvodnenia – Opatrovníctvo
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  7. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  8. Uznesenie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  9. Rozsudok bez odôvodnenia – Ostatné
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  10. Rozsudok bez odôvodnenia – 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, o zaplatenie 82261,61 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  2. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zníženie vyživovacej… Hearing was held on

  3. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, zmena zverenia Hearing was held on

  4. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, o zaplatenie 23590,72 Eur s… Hearing was held on

  5. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, o zaplatenie 2.400,- Eur s… Hearing was held on

  6. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, rozvod manželstva s prísl. Hearing was held on

  7. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, vrátenie spôsobilosti na… Hearing was held on

  8. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, rozvod manželstva s prísl. Hearing was held on

  9. Pojednávanie bez rozhodnutia, rozvod manželstva s prísl. Hearing was held on

  10. Pojednávanie a rozhodnutie, zvýšenie vyživovacej povinnosti 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.