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 Commercial agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Commercial agenda.
The judge worked 1513 days in the period and was assigned on average 76 cases per 100 days in main agendas.
In 2017, the judge received in total 26 from 40 possible points and ranked on 113 – 132. place of 651 evaluated judges.
The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 72.2% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 66.5%.
An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 9.2% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.5%.
Of the total number of the judge's judgements 2.6% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 2.8%.
Estimated average length of proceedings is 166.6 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.
The judge had 131 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.
The judge had 42 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 32.1% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.
In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 141.4% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.
Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:
The judge was mostly assigned to Commercial agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in Commercial agenda.
The judge worked 1094 days in the period and was assigned on average 56 cases per 100 days in main agendas.
In 2015, the judge received in total 29 from 40 possible points and ranked on 74 – 90. place of 738 evaluated judges.
The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 70.5% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 64.9%.
An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 10.7% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.8%.
Of the total number of the judge's judgements 3.2% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 3%.
Estimated average length of proceedings is 148 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.
The judge had 178 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.
The judge had 39 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 21.9% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.
In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 115.2% 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 Obchodná agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Obchodnej agende.
The judge in this period worked 661 days and on average was assigned 89 cases in 10 days in main agendas.
Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 65,9% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 63,7%.
Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 14,2% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 9,7%.
Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 4,8%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 3,4%.
Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 185 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.
Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 88 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.
Sudca mal na konci roka 49 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 37,7% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.
Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 101,2% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.
Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 23 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 253 – 268. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 6,25 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 16,75 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.