JUDr. Ladislav Lóška

  1. Active judge at the court Okresný súd Lučenec, we register 2,559 hearings and 1,909 judgements.
  1. The judge has been nominated to function for more than 22 years, bez časového obmedzenia funkcie.

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges.

Indicators for 2017

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 0
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 0

The judge was mostly assigned to Criminal agenda. The judge mostly issued judgements in translation missing: en.judges.indicators_2015.basic.decided_agenda.trestná.

The judge worked 1514 days in the period and was assigned on average 130 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2017, the judge received in total 22 from 40 possible points and ranked on 285 – 316. place of 651 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 6 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 62.7% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 66%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 271
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 170

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 8.8% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.7%.

Of the total number of the judge's judgements 3.3% is changed or reversed. The average in the same agenda is 2.9%.

Effectivity Indicators

Estimated average length of proceedings is 93.5 days. The average at the end of 2017 was 340.8 days.

The judge had 104 unresolved cases at the end of 2017. The average was 192.7 cases.

The judge had 33 restant cases at the end of 2017. The average was 111.7. This represents 31.7% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 54.1%.

In 2017, the judge was able to resolve 106.8% of assigned cases. Average was 141.8%.

Indicators for 2015

Number of Constitutional Court decisions against the judge:

  • Issued – 0
  • Delays prior to case assignment – 0

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

The judge worked 1052 days in the period and was assigned on average 101 cases per 100 days in main agendas.

Evaluation

In 2015, the judge received in total 25 from 40 possible points and ranked on 214 – 237. place of 738 evaluated judges.

  • Quality – 6 out of 15 points
  • Effectivity – 19 out of 25 points

Quality Indicators

The judge's judgements were on appeal affirmed in 63.3% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 63.8%.

  • Number of Appellate Decisions – 207
  • Number of Affirmed Decisions – 131

An appeal against the judge's judgements is filed in 9.4% of cases. The average in the same agenda is 8.1%.

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 112 days. The average at the end of 2015 was 339 days.

The judge had 122 unresolved cases at the end of 2015. The average was 377 cases.

The judge had 0 restant cases at the end of 2015. The average was 150. This represents 0% of the judge's unresolved cases. Average was 42.6%.

In 2015, the judge was able to resolve 95.9% 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 2011 – 2013:

Sudcovi bola prideľovaná najmä Trestná agenda. Sudca rozhodoval najmä v Trestnej agende.

The judge in this period worked 622 days and on average was assigned 144 cases in 10 days in main agendas.

Quality indicators

Rozhodnutie sudcu bolo v prípade odvolania potvrdené v 51% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 52,3%.

  • Number of appellate judgements – 96
  • Number of confirmed judgements – 49

Odvolanie proti rozhodnutiam sudcu je podávané v približne 10,3% prípadoch, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 8,4%.

Z celkového počtu rozhodnutí sudcu je zmenených alebo zrušených 5,1%, pričom priemer v rovnakej agende je 4%.

Efficiency indicators

Odhadovaná priemerná dĺžka konania sporu je 17 dní. Priemer bol na konci roka 346 dní.

Sudca mal na konci roka 2013 nevybavených 15 prípadov. Priemer bol 238.

Sudca mal na konci roka 3 reštančných vecí, pričom priemer je 126. To u sudcu tvorí 4,8% z nevybavených vecí. Priemer je 43,4.

Sudca dokázal v roku 2013 vybaviť, k počtu pridelených vecí, 101,6% prípadov. Priemer bol 99,6%.

Sudca získal podľa našej metodológie celkovo 28,5 bodov. Spomedzi 739 hodnotených sudcov sa umiestnil na 54 – 64. mieste. Za kvalitu získal 7 z 15 možných bodov, za efektivitu 21,5 z 25.

Notes

obtained from annual statistical reports of judges pertaining to indicators.

  • 2013 – 25.04.2013 – 26.04.2013 – Pracovné stretnutie sudcov KS BB
  • 2012 – 0 dní
  • 2011 – 0; 2012 – 0 dní; 2013 – 25.04.2013 – 26.04.2013 – Pracovné stretnutie sudcov KS BB
  • 2011 – 0

Published judgements

  1. Trestný rozkaz – Všeobecne nebezpečné a proti…
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  3. Rozsudok – Iné práva a slobody
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  4. Trestný rozkaz – Majetok
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

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

  6. Trestný rozkaz – Život a zdravie
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  7. Trestný rozkaz – Majetok
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  8. Trestný rozkaz – Majetok
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  9. Rozsudok – Majetok
    Prvostupňové nenapadnuté opravnými prostriedkami
    Judgement was issued on

  10. Trestný rozkaz – Všeobecne nebezpečné a proti…
    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. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, zločin krádeže Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Lučenec
    Judge – JUDr. Ladislav Lóška
    Defendant – O. S.
  2. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin porušovania… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Lučenec
    Judge – JUDr. Ladislav Lóška
    Defendant – H. J.
  3. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, zločin lúpeže a iné Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Lučenec
    Judge – JUDr. Ladislav Lóška
    Defendant – O. J.
  4. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin krádeže Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Lučenec
    Judge – JUDr. Ladislav Lóška
    Defendant – Z. I.
  5. Verejné zasadnutie s rozhodnutím, zločin sexuálneho… Hearing was held on

  6. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin porušovania… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Lučenec
    Judge – JUDr. Ladislav Lóška
    Defendant – Z. P.
  7. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin ohrozenia pod… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Lučenec
    Judge – JUDr. Ladislav Lóška
    Defendant – Q. F.
  8. Verejné zasadnutie s rozhodnutím, Návrh na uloženie… Hearing was held on

  9. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin krádeže Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Lučenec
    Judge – JUDr. Ladislav Lóška
    Defendant – J. I.
  10. Hlavné pojednávanie s rozhodnutím, prečin ublíženia na… Hearing was held on

    Court – Okresný súd Lučenec
    Judge – JUDr. Ladislav Lóška
    Defendant – H. Y.
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.