The Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic dismissed the constitutional complaint of JUDr. Barbora Plaskurová against the decision of the Disciplinary panel of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic

The Disciplinary Panel of the Supreme Administrative Court, by its decision from 23 October 2024 in Case No. 32D/6/2023, found the accused judge JUDr. Barbora Plaskurova of the District Court Trenčín, workplace Nové Mesto nad Váhom, guilty of breaching the duty of a judge to perform her duties diligently and in the allocated cases, to act promptly and without undue delays and also breaching her duty both in judicial office and in private life to refrain from any conduct that might compromise the dignity and integrity of the judicial function or violate the principles of judicial ethics. For this misconduct the Panel imposed a disciplinary sanction consisting of a 70% reduction in functional salary for a period of one year. In the remaining part of the disciplinary petition, the judge was acquitted. The Constitutional Court dismissed the constitutional complaint of the affected judge against the decision of the Supreme Administrative Court´s disciplinary panel.

The Disciplinary Panel of the Supreme Administrative Court found the judge of the District court Trenčín, workplace Nové Mesto nad Váhom, guilty of committing disciplinary misconduct by failing in five cases to meet statutory deadlines for preparing and delivering judgments thereby violating the judge´s duty to perform judicial duties diligently and to act promptly and without undue delays in allocated cases.

The judge also violated the judge’s duty to refrain from anything that could undermine the seriousness and dignity of the judge’s office and to adhere to the principles of judicial ethics by informing about her health problems during hearings in the presence of the participants in the proceedings outside the framework of the cases being heard, inquiring about security information about logging into the register, making a telephone call to her family member, informing her assistant about her telephone call to the Ministry of the Interior of the Slovak Republic in a matter related to the organization of the Court, refusing to open the ordered hearing, which she began only on the basis of a strong instruction from the Vice-President of the Court, and not being familiar with the Court file at her hearing.

The Disciplinary Panel further stated that the judge committed serious disciplinary misconduct by exerting constant pressure and creating time stress on senior judicial clerks through her excessive number of work demands and tasks which she labelled as urgent and by repeatedly contacting them by telephone during their absence from the workplace.

She also seriously compromised the dignity and integrity of the judicial function and violated the principles of judicial ethics by inserting into the case file submissions concerning the senior judicial clerk in which she questioned his expertise and experience although these matters were irrelevant to the proceedings. She acted in an offensive and condescending manner toward the senior judicial clerk of the appellate court. In relation to the preparation of draft judgments by the senior judicial clerk she set short deadlines that given the complexity of the files could not be objectively met.

The Court did not uphold the remaining part of the disciplinary petition. We informed the public about this matter in detail in the press release Disciplinary Panel sanctioned a judge for unethical behaviour dated 24 October 2024 (available online at: Disciplinary Panel punishes judge for unethical behaviour).

The affected judge challenged the decision of the Disciplinary Panel by lodging a constitutional complaint with the Constitutional Court. By its resolution on 11 September 2025, case file no. III. ÚS 531/2025, the Constitutional Court dismissed the constitutional complaint as manifestly unfounded. No remedy is available against the decision of the Constitutional court.