1. Data Collection and Court Management
Jaša Vrabec, LL.M.
Office for Court Management Development
Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia
Ministry of Justice, Amman, Jordan
6th of December 2014

2. STRUCTURE OF THE PRESENTATION
Some facts about the Republic of Slovenia
The Slovenian judicial system
Informatization
Data collection
Court management

3. SLOVENIA

4. SOME FACTS ABOUT THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA
Population:
Area: sq km
Borders: Austria, Italy, Croatia, Hungary
Capital: Ljubljana ( )
Official language(s): Slovene, also Italian and Hungarian in nationally mixed areas
GDP per capita in 2013: EUR (cca. 85% of EU 28)

5. SOME FACTS ABOUT THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA
June 1991 – Slovenia officially declares its independence
January 1992 – the EU officially recognizes Slovenia
May 1992 – Slovenia becomes a member of the UN
May 2004 – Slovenia becomes a member of the EU
January 2007 – the EURO becomes the official currency

6. SLOVENIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM
SUPREME
COURT
HIGHER
COURTS - 4
ADMINISTRATIVE
HIGHER LABOUR
AND SOCIAL
DISTRICT
COURTS - 11
LOCAL
COURTS - 44
LABOUR AND
SOCIAL

7. SLOVENIAN JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
Murska
Sobota
Slovenj
Gradec
Maribor
Ptuj
Kranj
Celje
Ljubljana
Krško
Nova Gorica
Novo mesto
Koper

8. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN COURTS
Local Court of Ljubljana:
111 judges and 424 court staff in 2013
(secretary, senior judicial advisers, other staff)‏
Local Court of Cerknica, Idrija, Lenart, Litija or Tolmin:
2 or 3 judges and from 11 to 15 court staff in 2013

9. AVERAGE TIME FOR SOLVING CASES AND THE NUMBER OF UNRESOLVED CASES ALL CASES WITHOUT MINOR OFFENCES

10. STRUCTURE OF RESOLVED CASES

11. STRUCTURE OF UNRESOLVED CASES

12. INFORMATIZATION Electronic procedures: Land register (ZK)
Court register - companies (SRg)
Inslovency procedures (INS)
Enforcement on the basis of authentic documents (COVL)

13. AVERAGE TIME FOR SOLVING CASES AND THE NUMBER OF UNRESOLVED CASES LANDREGISTER CASES

14. AVERAGE TIME FOR SOLVING CASES AND THE NUMBER OF UNRESOLVED CASES ENFORCEMENT CASES

15. DATA COLLECTION
Before 2008 data collection had the following characteristics:
Court registers were managed and filled manually
Court registers were managed for individual types of procedures and not on the level of the court as a whole
The time interval was set at every three months (each quarter)
The data collected was only basic (new, solved and unresolved cases, start and end of procedure).

16. DATA COLLECTION - EVOLUTION
After the Data Warehouse was built data are collected
Electronically
Centrally
Automatically
Up-to-date information
Time effective
Disburdened human resources
Better quality and reliability of data (Clearance rate, Disposition time, Age of pending caseload, Efficieny rate, Judge productivity, Personnel productivity, etc.)
Variety of possible inquiries – reports on demand
Better visualisation

18. THE DATA WAREHOUSE PROJECT
The main goal of the project is to improve decision making.
The goals and effects are the following:
To shorten the decision making time and eliminate backlogs
To have a better overview over the work of courts and allow benchmarking between courts
To provide for a more efficient resolution of old cases
To allow effective planning and equalisation of human resources in different courts
To rationalise the costs
To disburden judges of the preparation of statistical analysis.

19. PRESIDENT’S DASHBOARDS
The Supreme Court of Slovenia has developed and implemented a new integrated approach to court management by combining business- intelligence technology and managerial know-how.
In 2011, five dashboards named President's Performance Dashboards were developed as a data visualisation tool. Each dashboard is a visual display of the most important information.
The President’s Performance Dashboard project was one of the three finalists of the CEPEJ and EU Commission Crystal Scales of Justice Competition in 2012.

20. HUMAN RESOURCES

21. SOLVING CASES

22. BACKLOGS

23. EFFICIENCY

24. TYPES OF CASE SOLUTION

25. PRIORITY AREAS
The Supreme Court has prepared 5 priority areas that the Slovenian judiciary focused on in 2014:
Clearance of cases within the prescribed timeframes
Solving of oldest unresolved cases
Monitoring of judicial procedures
Disburdening the judges
Quality

26. COURT MANAGEMENT Support of the top level management
Culture of court management
Use of information tools - transparency of work
Objective criteria on the work of courts
Strategic management

27. COURT MANAGEMENT Strategic management - Overview of the work of courts
Distribution of human resources
Efficiency
Oldest unresolved cases
Type of case solution
Procedural phases
Regular visits of the President of the Supreme Court
Creation of time standards
Creation of specific programmes - Triage

28. DISTRIBUTION OF HUMAN RESOURCES

29. EFFICIENCY

30. OLDEST UNRESOLVED CASES

31. PROCEDURAL PHASES

32. RESULTS From 2008 to October 2014: Pending cases were reduced by 45%
Overall average time for solving cases fell by more than 3 months (from 7.0 to 3.3)
The increase in transparency allows more accurate information to the general public and helps improving the public confidence in the judicial system.

33. Thank you for your attention. Further information: jasa.vrabec@sodisce.si