Judge analytics — example
Statistics on how this judge handles cases: volume, forms of judgment, trend, outcomes in a sample. Every figure comes from actual judgments in the register, with a link to the source.
Analysed 4 812 judgments for the period 12.03.2015 — 10.09.2026. The predominant form is ruling (58%).
In loan-recovery cases the judge mostly grants the banks' claims but consistently reduces penalties under Art. 551(3) of the Civil Code. In moral-damage disputes the awarded amounts are below the court's average. The appellate court reverses about 9% of appealed judgments, mostly over deadlines and service of notices.
Written by the model from a sample of rulings; not an assessment of the judge. This is an example on fictional data.
Forms of judgments
Instances
Workload
Links with parties
Parties whose cases in the register concentrate on this particular judge. This is a signal worth checking, not a conclusion: concentration is often explained by territorial jurisdiction and automatic case allocation.
Outcomes in the sample
An estimate from a sample of the 2 160 most recent judgments (not the whole set) — an indication, not an exact share.
🗺️ Anomaly map — signals to check
✅ No official disciplinary proceedings found in the open data of the High Council of Justice.
The index counts signals to verify, not the correctness of decisions.
📊 Prykladiv District Court of the City of Prykladiv: this judge has 3 flag(s), the court median is 2 (max 9) · within the median
Median across judges of the same court with at least 30 analysed rulings.
«…to recover three percent per annum for the period from 01.01.2025 to 15.05.2025 in the amount of UAH 4,812…»
Conclusion: The debt fell due on 15.02.2025 (clause 4.2 of the contract), so accrual for the six weeks before that has no basis.
🔍 Compare the due date in the contract with the claimant's calculation.
The judge position: The court took the accrual period from the claimant's calculation without checking the due date.
Alternative under the norm: Art. 625 applies only to an overdue obligation; there was no delay before 15.02.2025 (Art. 530 Civil Code).
🔍 To check: clause 4.2 of the contract, payment records for January–February 2025.
📝 Draft an appeal from the “Professional” plan
«…the court finds the risks under Art. 177 CPC sufficient to apply the most severe preventive measure…»
Conclusion: The ruling does not explain why bail or house arrest would not secure the suspect's compliance.
🔍 Check whether each milder measure was assessed separately (Art. 176(3) CPC).
📝 Draft an appeal from the “Professional” plan
This is not an assessment of legality or guilt — quoted facts and the provision, for you to check.
Appeals and reversals (on a sample)
Of the 400 most recent first-instance judgments, 160 were reviewed by a higher court. Based on a sample, with a link to the ruling — an indication, not an exact share.
Norms and Supreme Court practice (flags to check)
The articles this judge relies on most often (a sample of 300 judgments):
Supreme Court practice on the same articles — compare the position:
This is not an assessment of whether the judgments are right. Only facts for you to check: which provisions were applied and how the Supreme Court reads them.
Recent judgments
Day pass — UAH 129 for 24 hours, subscription from UAH 790 per month. Open registry data about a judge is free.
All names, titles, case numbers and figures on this page are fictional and only show the format of the analytics.