{"id":48213,"date":"2022-11-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2022-11-21T23:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/?p=48213"},"modified":"2026-04-22T12:33:41","modified_gmt":"2026-04-22T10:33:41","slug":"the-disciplinary-panel-finds-a-judge-of-the-zvolen-district-court-guilty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/the-disciplinary-panel-finds-a-judge-of-the-zvolen-district-court-guilty\/","title":{"rendered":"The Disciplinary panel finds a judge of the Zvolen District Court guilty"},"content":{"rendered":"

The disciplinarily accused judge has intentionally violated on several occasions in the performance of his duties as a judge his duty to refrain from anything that could undermine the dignity and respectability of the office of judge and endanger confidence in the independent, impartial and fair decision-making of the courts [Section 30(1) of Act No 385\/2000 Coll. on Judges and Judges Advocate and on Amendments and Additions to Certain Acts, as amended (hereinafter referred to as the “Judges’ Act”)]. He also failed to observe the principles of judicial ethics in the performance of his duties as a judge.<\/strong><\/p>\n

By his conduct, the disciplinary accused judge also deliberately violated the duty of a judge to perform his duties conscientiously (Article 30(4) of the Judges Act) and to act in such a way as not to impede in any way the administration of justice (Article 30(8) of the Judges Act). At Tuesday’s hearing, the Disciplinary panel found that the harmfulness of the conduct of the disciplinary accused judge was increased, taking into account the degree of culpability, the manner of conduct and repetition of the conduct.<\/p>\n

The disciplinary accused judge of the Zvolen District Court, Mgr. Dalibor Mi\u013ean repeatedly refused to cover his upper respiratory tract at the workplace during the pandemic. This obligation – to use preventive protective equipment in order to properly cover the upper respiratory tract – was imposed by the regulations of the Office of Public Health of the Slovak Republic in force at the time, in conjunction with Section 51(1)(a) of Act No 355\/2007 Coll. on the Protection, Promotion and Development of Public Health and on Amendments and Additions to Certain Acts, in the version in force at the time of the decision. The Disciplinary panel found that the legislation in force at the time could not have been assessed by the disciplinary defendant himself as not binding on him. If he had doubts as to the validity of the individual decrees, he could have challenged them by the procedures provided for in the legal order.<\/p>\n

Today’s decision of Disciplinary panel 31D of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic is not final and the applicant – the President of the Zvolen District Court – has the right to appeal against it.<\/p>\n

The decision on the guilty plea was adopted by a 3:2 vote, the decision on the penalty plea by a 5:0 vote.<\/p>\n

In the disciplinary case, the President of the Zvolen District Court c\/a Judge Mgr. Dalibor Mi\u013ean, the Disciplinary panel 31D of the Supreme Administrative Court of the Slovak Republic was composed of: the President of the Panel JUDr. Zdenka Reisenauerov\u00e1, the Judges Mgr. Michal Novotn\u00fd, Prof. JUDr. Juraj Va\u010dok, PhD. (Judge-rapporteur) and lay judges Mgr. Marianna Leontiev and Mgr. Eva Kov\u00e1\u010dechov\u00e1.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Pod\u013ea disciplin\u00e1rneho sen\u00e1tu Najvy\u0161\u0161ieho spr\u00e1vneho s\u00fadu Slovenskej republiky sa disciplin\u00e1rne obvinen\u00fd sudca Okresn\u00e9ho s\u00fadu Zvolen Mgr. Dalibor Mi\u013ean dopustil pokra\u010dovacieho z\u00e1va\u017en\u00e9ho disciplin\u00e1rneho previnenia. Disciplin\u00e1rny sen\u00e1t mu za to ulo\u017eil disciplin\u00e1rne opatrenie, a\u00a0to zn\u00ed\u017eenie funk\u010dn\u00e9ho platu o\u00a060 % na obdobie jedn\u00e9ho roka. Disciplin\u00e1rny n\u00e1vrh na disciplin\u00e1rne obvinen\u00e9ho sudcu podala predsedn\u00ed\u010dka Okresn\u00e9ho s\u00fadu Zvolen (sp. zn. 31 D 7\/2022).<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":88,"featured_media":35227,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[73,76],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-48213","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-press-release","category-disciplinary-decisions"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48213","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/88"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=48213"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48213\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":56668,"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/48213\/revisions\/56668"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/35227"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=48213"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=48213"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nssud.sk\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=48213"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}