European Commission - Eurostat

F4: Income and living conditions; Quality of life

European Commission - Eurostat
Unit ESTAT.F.4: Income and living conditions; Quality of life L-2920 Luxembourg

The figures from 2022 year of reference onwards on court cases are based on the data collected by the Commission for the efficiency of justice (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe (CoE). It is available at country level for European Union Member States.
The statistics include the number of cases divided by status incoming (brought to court)/resolved/pending at the end of the year for the categories criminal (total) and other than criminal (non-criminal) (total). For the category other than criminal (non-criminal), two sub-categories are provided: litigious civil and/or commercial, and administrative.

Regions are classified by Nomenclature of territorial units for statistics (NUTS).
Legal status is classified according to United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime definitions.

Justice statistics

For further information on concepts and definitions see the CEPEJ explanatory note to the scheme for evaluating european judicial systems 2024 cycle (2022 data)

CASES PROCESSED BY THE COURTS
First instance courts
Definition: Refers to the initial trial courts where legal proceedings are first heard
Incoming (Brought to court)
Definition: All cases submitted to court for the first time. Cases which have already been submitted to a court at the same instance level (after an appeal for example) are counted again. 
Resolved cases
Definition: All the procedures which have come to an end at the instance level during the year of reference, either through a judgment or through any other decision which ended the procedure (provisional decisions or procedural decisions not ending the case (e.g., on parties, perfection of the claims, allowing or disallowing the evidence, expenses etc.) should not be counted here).
Pending cases
Definition: it refers to the total number of cases that are not completed at the end of the reference year (by 31st December).

Criminal cases (total)
Definition: This includes all cases (severe or misdemeanour according to CEPEJ definitions) for which a sanction may be imposed by a judge, even if this sanction is foreseen, in some national systems, in an administrative code (e.g. fines or community service). It also includes “other criminal cases” which are an exception to the general definition of criminal cases, as this category of cases usually includes procedures in which sanction may not be imposed (such as criminal investigation, enforcement of criminal sanctions etc.) when such procedures are in the jurisdiction of courts. The offenses sanctioned directly by the police or by an administrative authority, and not by a judge, are not counted.

Other than Criminal cases (Non-Criminal cases)
Definition: Includes Civil/Commercial litigious, non-litigious cases (including general civil/commercial non-litigious cases, registry cases and other non-litigious cases), administrative cases and other non-criminal cases. See below definition for Civil/Commercial litigious and Administrative cases.

Litigious Civil/Commercial cases
Definition: Litigious civil (and commercial) cases are for instance litigious divorce cases or disputes regarding contracts. In some countries commercial cases are addressed by special commercial courts, whilst in other countries these cases are handled by ordinary (civil) courts. Bankruptcy proceedings must be understood as litigious proceedings. Despite the organisational differences between countries in this respect, all the information concerning civil and commercial cases should be included in the same category. If appropriate, litigious civil (and commercial) cases do not include administrative law cases (see category Administrative cases). Any other type of litigious cases (e.g. judicial appeal against deeds processed by an enforcement agent) is included in this category.

Administrative cases
Definition: Administrative law cases (litigious or non-litigious) concern disputes between citizens and (local, regional or national) authorities, for instance: asylum refusals or refusals of construction permit applications. Administrative cases are considered only if processed in court and not when it is only an issue under any administrative body. Administrative law cases are in some countries addressed by special administrative courts or tribunals, whilst in other countries they are handled by the ordinary civil courts. If countries have special administrative courts/tribunals or separate administrative law procedures or are anyway able to distinguish between administrative law cases and civil law cases, these figures should be indicated separately under “administrative law cases”.

The basic statistical units are cases processed by the courts.

For administrative data, the statistical population for each statistic is the complete register (all the relevant records). 

European Union Member States
CY: The data provided by Cyprus do not include data of the territory which is not under the effective control of the Government of Cyprus

The current tables are available from 2022 year of reference onwards.
Tables on Legal cases processed in first instance courts by legal status of the court process (brought to court, resolved, pending at the end of the period) are available from 2008 since 2022 for the categories criminal, civil and/or commercial (including litigious and non-litigious), administrative and other non criminal, collected by Eurostat. Since 2022 data, data are provided to Eurostat by CEPEJ and disseminated in a different dataset.

Not applicable.

Absolute number.
Rate per 100.000 population size.

Population size is defined as resident population January 1st according to Eurostat database population figures.

The standard reference period is the calendar year.

Data are collected for the EU Justice Scoreboard, that is part of the Rule of Law Report.

Council of Europe and European Commission agreed on data sharing of number of first instance courts cases for the following categories: Other than criminal (total non-criminal), civil and commercial litigious, administrative, criminal (total).

Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 on European statistics  (recital 24 and Article 20(4)) of 11 March 2009 (OJ L 87, p. 164), stipulates the need to establish common principles and guidelines ensuring the confidentiality of data used for the production of European statistics and the access to those confidential data with due account for technical developments and the requirements of users in a democratic society.

Not applicable.

Data are released approximately 17 months after the reference year, only after the publication of the EU Justice Scoreboard.

Release calendar

In line with the Community legal framework and the European Statistics Code of Practice Eurostat disseminates European statistics on Eurostat's website (see item 10 - 'Accessibility and clarity') respecting professional independence and in an objective, professional and transparent manner in which all users are treated equitably. The detailed arrangements are governed by the Eurostat protocol on impartial access to Eurostat data for users 

Annual.

Ad hoc press releases on the day of dissemination of the EU Justice Scoreboard in the Press corner of the EU Commission or of the General-Directorate for Justice an Consumers

Data are disseminated in the EU Justice Scoreboard and on CEPEJ website.

Tables are available on-line Database - Crime and criminal justice and are updated annually within 17 months of the reference year.

Not assessed.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Each state designates national correspondent to collect the relevant data in respect of its judicial system and deliver it to the CEPEJ. The national correspondents are the main interlocutors of the CEPEJ Secretariat in ensuring the availability and quality of the data. The published data are exclusively provided by the national correspondents. Each country determines which authority is the original source of the national data.

The CEPEJ methodology used during data collection and quality check process includes the following tools:
- The questionnaire on evaluation of the judicial systems
- The dedicated explanatory note
- Defined quality check process (see 18.4)
Specifics of the methodology of some countries are listed in the comments for each country.

Not applicable.

No comments.

No comments.

No comments.

No comments.

CEPEJ collects the Criminal Cases by the breakdown of 1- Severe criminal cases, 2- Misdemeanour and/or minor criminal cases, 3 - Other criminal cases.

General comments on Criminal cases by countries:

BG: For most of the crimes, the Bulgarian Criminal Code provides for a deprivation of liberty, which makes the distinction hard to be made. The offences could be divided into two categories: common offences and offences subject to private prosecution. For the common offences, the search of responsibility is subordinated to the common regime (there is a public interest concerned or public interest and personal goods). Such are the crimes against individuals (homicide, grievous or intermediate bodily harm, rape, fornication and etc.), crimes against the property (the list is not exhaustive). As to the offences subject to private prosecution, the criminal proceedings are initiated upon a complaint by the affected person (personal interests of the affected person, and usually the affected person and the perpetrator are close relatives). Those offences have a lower degree of public danger and affect less the rights of the concerned person. Such offences are the minor bodily injury, the insult, the slander and etc.
"Total criminal cases" includes all criminal cases - criminal cases of a general nature, criminal cases of a private nature, cases of exemption from criminal liability with the imposition of an administrative penalty in accordance with Art. 78a of the Criminal Code, private criminal cases, interrogation and administrative-criminal cases heard by the first instance courts.

CZ: We are not able distinguish between serious offences and minor offences. Thus only total number of cases is reported. There are no cases that could be reported in "Other cases".

DK: When we categorize cases as "severe", it does not mean that privation of liberty is the end result, but based on the category chosen by the court to deal with the case could include severe cases. Minor cases are typically fines that will never have as a result of privation of liberty. Probably there are too many cases under the category "severe" then, but that is the figures we have.

DE: General information on the statistics used as sources for answering the questions in this section: see General Comment to Other than criminal (Non-criminal) cases.
The category “severe criminal cases” includes criminal proceedings in accordance with the Criminal Code and ancillary criminal laws. The category “misdemeanour and/or minor criminal cases” subsumes regulatory fine proceedings before criminal courts.
“Other cases” include:
- proceedings concerning suspension of execution of the remainder of a sentence of life imprisonment or concerning suspension of execution of placement in a psychiatric hospital or in preventive detention - determinate custodial sentences - proceedings under sections 109, 110, 138 of the Prison Act (Strafvollzugsgesetz, StVollzG) - proceedings under Part IV of the Act on International Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (Gesetz über die internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen, IRG) and section 71 (4) of Part II - supervision of conduct
- complaints about costs/fees - complaints against search/seizure orders - complaints in economic cases and tax cases
- complaints in matters concerning detention - cases in matters falling within the Regulatory Offences Act (Ordnungswidrigkeitengesetz, OWiG) registered in the complaints register - other complaints - subsequent or reserved preventive detention
- proceedings regarding the order of subsequent or reserved preventive detention - proceedings regarding the suspension of execution of a sentence where the court has reserved the order of preventive detention, in the cases covered by section 462a (2), third sentence, of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Strafprozessordnung, StPO)
- proceedings before the judicial service court
- proceedings regarding health professionals, tax consultants, agents in tax matters, patent lawyers or architects
- other disciplinary proceedings - proceedings regarding legal remedies in matters of enforcement of youth custody, youth detention and remand detention
Only the number of incoming cases is available for "other criminal cases", because with regard to data collection through the "monthly surverys" these cases fall into the category “other caseload” (see General Comment Other than criminal (Non-criminal) cases)
Horizontal inconsistencies: See General Comment to Other than criminal (Non-criminal) cases.

IE: Except for the Supreme Court, criminal cases are generally counted by offence rather than case due to the various ICT systems used. This is due to data collection/ ICT systems that are in use by the Court Service. Akin to Other than criminal (Non-criminal) cases, the number of pending criminal law cases cannot be provided within the frame of Criminal cases, provided that it is not recorded in caseload data. Misdemeanour and/or minor criminal cases include all cases triable summarily (e.g. common assault, public order offences, burglary or theft in other that aggravated circumstances).

ES: When an error is detected in the statistics of a Court, the latter is allowed doing regularization, what means that the Court communicates the correct figure and rectifies the wrong one even if this does not concord with figures offered for previous exercises. This situation can happen for example in the specific control of cases that the Court makes when a judge leaves the Court (called “alarde”), but in general, in any case in which the Judicial Counsellor detects an error that comes from previous exercises but cannot be localized. The system prefers to correct the data than continue and amplify the error. These regularizations and the cumulated cases and the re-opened cases are the causes for the horizontal inconsistencies.

CY: The reason for not having data for the subcategories of cases is that there was no electronic filing system that would enable us to have statistical data on different types of cases.

LV: Severe criminal cases include all criminal cases according to the Criminal law - it includes all cases where a harmful offense (act or failure to act) committed deliberately (intentionally) or through negligence, provided for the Criminal Law, and for the commission of which criminal punishment is set out shall be considered a criminal offense. Misdemeanor and / or minor criminal cases includes all administrative infringement cases according to the Law on Administrative liability about administrative offence of a person for which administrative liability is provided for in a law or binding regulations of local governments. Other criminal cases include execution of a sentence, cases on penal order of the prosecutor, cases on determination of compulsory measures of a medical nature. In 2022 the increase in the balance of pending cases is related to changes in data collection systems` audit, more specifically, for misdemeanour and / or minor criminal cases.

LU: We have classified as minor offenses all cases concluded by penal order in the magistrate's court or district court. Serious offenses encompass all cases concluded by judgment at first instance in the magistrate's court, correctional court, or criminal court. The figures listed under 'other cases' correspond to those cases which were referred to the investigating department. Regarding the unavailability of pending and incoming cases: Due to the specific organization of workflow between courts and public prosecution service, files are only transferred to courts shortly before a hearing date, and if a case is not heard on that scheduled date, they are then returned to the public prosecution service until a new hearing date. Thus, there are - with few exceptions - no pending cases before criminal courts over an extended period, and the number of incoming cases is more or less equal to the number of resolved ones.

HU: Criminal offences are severe or minor crimes. Severe crimes (bűntett) are committed intentionally and are punishable with at least two years of imprisonment. All other criminal offences are minor crimes (vétség). Crimes that are not committed intentionally are always considered as minor crimes, despite the possible punishment. Misdemeanours (szabálysértés) are not considered as criminal offences, but are unlawful acts that are endangering the society. The authorities intervening in their respect are the police, the district office, or the National Tax and Customs Office. Their decisions can be reviewed by the relevant section of the respective district court upon request of the accused person. Generally, the court rules without oral hearings, based upon the available documents. However, it can set a hearing if it finds it necessary or if the person charged by a misdemeanor requests it. The judgment is a final and enforceable decision. It is noteworthy that the Hungarian law identifies also the category of civil offences encompassing offences mainly against public administration. However some criminal offenses, such as property crimes involving objects of small value (under 50000 HUF), are classified in this category as well. Civil offences fall under the jurisdiction of various administrative agencies, local governments or traffic police, but not the courts. Concerning the methodology of presentation of data, as according to the Hungarian Criminal Code not only severe crimes (bűntett), but also almost every minor crime (vétség) are punishable with imprisonment, both categories were included into the category “severe criminal cases”. Thus misdemeanors (szabálysértés) were included into the category “minor criminal cases”.

NL: Classification of severe and minor cases:

Minor offences: mainly traffic offences (speeding tickets, running red lights) and petty theft, vagrancy, littering, etc.

Severe offences: driving while drunk, grand theft, violent crimes, vice, drugs/narcotics, etc.

RO: There is no classification of severe and less severe offences in the Romanian statistics.
SI: Other cases: criminal investigations at district courts, criminal cases against juveniles in preparatory proceedings, execution of the sanction of prison, execution of criminal sanctions of foreign courts, criminal investigation actions at local and district courts, cases of the out-of-hearing senate, clemency procedures at local and district courts, legal aid between national courts in criminal matters, international legal aid in criminal matters, cases of decisions to permit interventions within human rights and freedoms, legal aid between courts in minor offences, international legal aid in minor offences, search of premises, setting a task for the good of the community or the local community, compliance detention. various criminal matters at local and district courts and in minor offences at local courts.
Regarding criminal investigations at district courts: Slovenia has a system where the state public prosecutor can request a (first instance) court to perform a criminal investigation (or individual investigatory acts). When this procedure at court is finished, the case is returned to the state prosecutor, who can decide whether to dismiss a case or file an accusatory act at the (same) court. When the accusatroy act is filed, a criminal trial (i.e. deliberating on the responsibility and sanctioning of the offender) begins.
Regarding setting a task for the good of the community or the local community: A request for prison sentence or fine to be replaced by a task for the good of the community can be filed after the finality of the main court decision and is decided upon in a separate proceedings.
Regarding compliance detention: In minor offences cases, if the fine is not paid in due time, a compliance detention (to comply with paying the fine) is ordered. The proposal is decided upon by a local court according to the domicile of the offender. Compliance detention last up until the fine is paid, but can not exceed 30 days. The obligation to pay fine does not cease with detention.
Regarding varous cases: this category is composed of different (accesory) proceedings, not fitting in any of the categories above.
SK: The statistical data collected by the Ministry of Justice of the Slovak Republic does not allow the categorization of the criminal matters according to the types of criminal offences as defined in explanatory note.

FI: The cases are not statistically catecorised in severe criminal cases and misdemeanour and / or minor cases in Finland. The case management systems from which the data is collected are not static reporting tool but a dynamic and constantly changing system. So the exact number depends on the day the data is taken from the system. Part of the data here is collected on january 2023 and reflects the situation on that day. The data available is: 1)Incoming cases 2)Resolved cases 3)Cases pending on the data collection date. The number of pending cases as of 1 January has been calculated based on the available data. Because of the dynamic nature of the system, the previously annouced number of cases on 31 December and the now announced number of cases in 1 Jan will differ.

Comments on 2022 data on Criminal cases by countries:

BE: Also to be noted: 9,398 for 'youth court cases' (only the category 'new cases' is available), not accounted for in the table. Point 3: Other criminal cases: the figure of 15,309 corresponds to cases before the Council Chamber (this figure is not included in the total of new criminal cases because data on completed cases is unavailable). The figures for pending and completed cases are not available.

BG: "Total criminal cases" includes all criminal cases - criminal cases of a general nature, criminal cases of a private nature, cases of exemption from criminal liability with the imposition of an administrative penalty in accordance with Art. 78a of the Criminal Code, private criminal cases, interrogation and administrative-criminal cases heard by the first instance courts.

DK: In 2022 the courts are still dealing with a high number of pending cases in the aftermath of the situation with covid-19.

DE: “Severe criminal cases” include criminal proceedings according to the Criminal Code and ancillary criminal laws. The category “misdemeanour and/or minor criminal cases” includes regulatory fine proceedings before criminal courts.
“Other criminal cases” include: - proceedings at the penal execution chambers (concerning suspension of execution of the remainder of a sentence of life imprisonment or concerning suspension of execution of placement in a psychiatric hospital or in preventive detention, determinate custodial sentences, proceedings under sections 109, 110, 138 of the Prison Act (Strafvollzugsgesetz, StVollzG), proceedings under Part IV of the Act on International Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters (Gesetz über die internationale Rechtshilfe in Strafsachen, IRG) and section 71 (4) of Part II)
- proceedings regarding supervision of conduct
- complaints about costs/fees - complaints against search/seizure orders - complaints in economic cases and tax cases
- complaints in matters concerning detention - cases in matters falling within the Regulatory Offences Act (Ordnungswidrigkeitengesetz, OWiG) registered in the complaints register - other complaints - subsequent or reserved preventive detention
- proceedings regarding the order of subsequent or reserved preventive detention - proceedings regarding the suspension of execution of a sentence where the court has reserved the order of preventive detention, in the cases covered by section 462a (2), third sentence, of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Strafprozessordnung, StPO)
- proceedings before the judicial service court
- proceedings regarding health professionals, tax consultants, agents in tax matters, patent lawyers or architects
- other disciplinary proceedings - proceedings regarding legal remedies in matters of enforcement of youth custody, youth detention and remand detention With regard to "other criminal cases", only the number of incoming cases is recorded (exception: proceedings concerning supervision of conduct).

IE: The COVID pandemic had an effect on the courts’ ability to deal with incoming business in 2020 especially, which explains the discrepancies with number of resolved cases in 2022. Regarding severe criminal cases both the Circuit Criminal Courts and Central Criminal Courts showed an increase in resolved cases (offences) in 2022. Resolved cases are cases where orders are made. There may be more than one order made in some cases which is why the figure for resolved cases is higher than that for incoming cases.

ES: There are increases of incoming and resolved cases compared to the number of cases in 2020. It should be taken into account that information from 2020 represents the year of the pandemic. The recovery of normal work increased the number of cases, incoming and resolved.

FR: Source: Ministry of Justice/SG/SEM/SDSE, Cassiopeia statistical file. With regard to the total stock of criminal cases, it is not possible for us to provide this information as the data on the stock of police courts ('Minor Offences') is not available. Furthermore, the line 'Total number' does not correspond to 1+2+3 but rather to 1+2. Indeed, in accordance with the request from CEPEJ, cases falling under the Investigating Judge have been classified under '3. Other Criminal Cases'. These are provided for indicative purposes only and should not be added to the other two categories so as to avoid duplication (which may fall within either minor or major offences depending on how each case proceeds).

HR: The data for 2022 in “Other criminal cases” include only the execution of sanctions (imprisonment), investigation actions of a judge and cases connected to procedural matters. In this cycle, the number of other criminal cases decreased because we aligned our methodology with CEPEJ reporting and excluded some of the case types which in previous cycles were included. This is due to the fact that data for misdemeanour cases came from a separate case management system in the previous cycles (prior to 2020), and it was not possible to exclude those cases which do not fit any of the above categories.

IT: In the framework of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR) Italy has undertaken a series of actions in order to reduce both disposition time and backlogs. More information about the reform can be found at https://www.italiadomani.gov.it/content/sogei-ng/it/en/Interventi/riforme/riforme-orizzontali/riforma-della-giustizia.html

LV: The decrease in the number of resolved cases is related to the drop in the number of cases received in the courts of first instance. Decrease of pending cases on 1 Jan is related to the decrease of misdemeanour and / or minor criminal cases. In the middle of 2020, Saeima adopted Law on Administrative Liability that affected amount of incoming and resolved of misdemeanour and / or minor criminal cases significantly. According to the law, if the person intends to use his right to appeal a decision, he/she needs to address the complain to the higher official from institution which has made this decision, but if there is no higher official, a decision may be appealed to a district (city) court. This is the main reason for decrease of incoming misdemeanour and / or minor criminal cases. In 2022 the increase in the number of pending cases at the end of the year is related to changes in data collection systems` audit, more specifically, for misdemeanour and / or minor criminal cases. Severe criminal cases, which are assessed according to the Latvian Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure Law, are decreasing each year. The tendency of the decrease in the number of criminal cases has been observed for a longer period of time. The reduction of severe criminal cases can be explained by changes in legislation. (In the summer of 2020, amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law entered into force, which stipulated that the case for minor violations of the criminal law is not referred for initiation of criminal proceedings (Section 373 An investigator with a consent of a prosecutor or a prosecutor may refuse to initiate criminal proceedings, if a misdemeanor has been committed), which affected the the total number of criminal law cases received in court. A decrease in the number of criminal cases received has been observed since 2019. The number of pending cases (pending for more then 2 years) has significantly decreased. The decrease in cases is due to the lifting of restrictions, which were related to limiting the spread of Covid-19. The reduction of pending cases also is related to the court reform, increased interest and pressure of the public, the Council of Justice and the Ministry of Justice to reduce the number of long pending criminal cases. Starting from 2022, data on "other criminal cases" are also collected and inserted in the table. 

LT: Protracted proceedings in criminal cases are caused by the non-appearance of the parties to the proceedings or their representatives at the court session, the request of the parties to the proceedings to postpone the proceedings and the collection of additional evidence. It can be concluded that the protracted examination of criminal cases is also usually determined by circumstances depending on the actions of the participants in the process.
LU: In our consideration of minor offences, we have included all cases concluded by penal order in the magistrate's court or district court. Serious offences encompass all cases concluded by judgment at first instance in the magistrate's, correctional or criminal court. The figures recorded under 'other cases' correspond to those matters brought before the investigating office.

HU: As misdemeanour cases have very strict deadlines, the number of resolved cases strongly correlates with the number of incoming cases. The decrease of incoming cases may be a result of the end of the pandemic as misdemeanours in connection with it "disappeared" as well.

MT: Since in Malta the vast majority of the cases contemplate the possibility of imprisonment, barring a few contraventions, the cases indicated as misdemeanors/minor offences, are those cases which are heard by the Court of Magistrates (excluding those being heard as a Court of Criminal Inquiry) having a maximum punishment of 2 years imprisonment while the cases indicated as 'severe criminal offences' are those having a punishment of over 2 years (Criminal Court & Court of Criminal Inquiry).

NL: Increase in Category 1 - This is due to a technical change in registration, where it was found that some 14.500 cases were effectively resolved (from a legal standpoint) but had remained ‘open’ in the administration. This has lead to a decrease of the number of pending cases. Increase in Category 2 - These cases are both minor criminal offences and also traffic fine cases (so-called WAHV- or Mulder-cases). The latter group shows the main increase. Possibly the increase is due to numbers being low in 2020 and 2021 as a result of Corona, and increased mobility since then.
PL: Severe criminal cases includes all offences under the Penal Code, Penal Fiscal Code and offences specified in other Acts. Misdemeanours are cases conducted under the Petty Offence Code.
The category “Other cases” covers the rest of cases conducted in criminal courts which are not connected directly with the severe criminal cases or misdemeanours (mainly cases conducted under the Code of Criminal Procedure and Petty Offences Procedure Code).
Cases under the Criminal Procedure Code and the Misdemeanours Code, which are presented as 'other criminal cases', are preliminary or follow-up proceedings.
PT: In our view, the increase in the number of incoming and outgoing cases in 2022 compared to 2020 reflects the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic and the resulting lockdown, which had an impact on the functioning of the courts in 2020, considering that in certain periods face-to-face services were interrupted or conditioned. 3. "Other criminal cases" - cases involving procedural types provided for in criminal law, which do not fall into the "severe criminal cases" and "minor criminal cases" categories. These are, for example, cases relating to "legal accumulation", "interrogation of foreigners", "judicial expulsion", "compulsory internment" and "habeas corpus".
SK: Among "Other criminal cases" it is possible to include, for example, motions regarding the expungement of a conviction, motions regarding the imposition of protective measures and the execution of detention, motions related to custody and the execution of a sentence, motions for conditional release, motions related to probation and mediation, requests from domestic and foreign authorities in criminal cases, motions that are decided in preliminary proceedings, etc. Other discrepancies are reflection either of the submission activity of the prosecutors or productivity of the judicial system (judicial staff) in resolved cases.

SE: Starting on January 1st in 2022 a distinction was made possible between severe, minor and other incoming criminal cases at district courts. However, the statistics will not be reliable until after a year or two due to continued registration of resolved cases without this refined distinction. The number of criminal cases received in total has increased over a number of years, but in 2022 the increase stopped, although the number of cases remained at very high levels. The number of cases relating to "rapid proceedings" decreased at the district courts that have been active in the trial operation for the longest, that is the district courts in the Stockholm region. Furthermore courts joined the trial operation during 2022. Criminal cases resolved increased by one percent, and pending cases decreased by two percent for the first time since 2015.

CEPEJ collects the Other than criminal (Non-criminal) cases  by the breakdown of  1 - Civil (and commercial) litigious cases, 2 - Total non-litigious cases (as sum of 2.1- General civil (and commercial) non-litigious cases, 2.2 - Registry cases and 2.3- Other non-litigious cases),  3 -Administrative law cases and 4- Other cases.

General comments on Other than criminal (Non-criminal) cases by countries:

BG: The division by types of cases in the statistical forms published by the Supreme Judicial Council of Bulgaria is quite different from the CEPEJ categorisation and for that reason breakdown cannot be made. Only administrative cases are possible to differentiate due to existence of administrative courts. Furthermore, in Bulgaria registry cases are not resolved by courts. They are under the competence of the Registry agency where is the property register, the commercial register, the BULSTAD register and the Register of the Property Relations between spouses.

CZ: For years 2010, 2012 and 2013, business register cases, administrative cases and insolvency registry cases which are decided by the regional courts (second instance courts) acting as first instance courts, were included in the table concerning the case-load of second instance courts. On the contrary, since 2014, administrative cases, business registry cases and insolvency cases (and also some litigious cases) which are still decided by the second instance courts acting as first instance courts, are subsumed within the table of first instance corts (which was already the case for the 2008 exercise). Methodology has been changed in year 2015 – more case types have been included, which led to the big increment in the number of cases. There are no further changes expected.

DK: As concerns "non-litigious business registry cases", it is important to note that pending cases always may vary a lot as it is a residual figure when pending prior to the period, received and resolved cases are counted. Furthermore, the reason for the discrepancy is that we do not have pending figures from the Maritime and Commercial High Court. The number of “administrative law cases” which are litigious is encompassed in the number of “civil and commercial litigious cases”. With regard to "non litigious land registry cases", it should be pointed out that due to the high amount of incoming and resolved cases, the residual figure of pending cases prior and after the period may vary.

DE: General information on the statistics used as sources for answering the questions in this section:
Once per year, the Federal Statistical Office compiles and publishes the statistics of the civil, criminal, administrative, finance, social, family and labour courts. Nationwide uniform ordinances define the scope and rules of data collection for these statistics. The courts collect the data and submit it to the statistical offices of the Länder, who check and edit the data and send it to the Federal Statistical Office. In simplified terms, the ordinances provide two different kinds of data collection sheets: The "procedural surverys" that collect data on the specifics of the proceedings happening at a court and the "monthly surveys" that track the caseload of a court. With regard to the caseload count, the monthly surveys distinguish between "caseload of proceedings covered by the procedural surveys" and "other caseload". For the cases from the first category (proceedings covered by the procedural surveys), the monthly surveys collect the number of cases pending at the beginning and at the end of a month as well as the number of received and resolved cases. For the "other caseload", the monthly surveys only count the number of received cases.
"General civil (and commercial) non-litigious cases": The figure represents the number of non-litigious enforcement cases. In the monthly survey for the statistics of the civil courts, these cases fall into the category of "other caseload". This is the reason why only the number of incoming cases is available. Non litigious land registry cases: The figure represents the number of incoming requests with regard to entries, change of entries or deletion of entries in the land registry. This data is not part of the statistics of the civil courts but was taken from the statistics on the workload of the Local Courts in matters of non-contentious jurisdiction (according to the Act on Proceedings in Family Matters and in Matters of Non-contentious Jurisdiction - FamFG). The number of pending and resolved land registry cases is not collected within the framework of this statistic.
Horizontal inconsistencies in the table: The inconsistencies with regard to the pending cases at the end of the year also occur in the statistics published by the Federal Statistical Office. The reason for this is, that courts submit count corrections for the monthly surveys at the end of the year. 

IE: Historically, the number of pending civil cases has not been recorded in caseload data, as many cases initiated before the Irish courts either settle out of court or are not proceeded with by the plaintiff/applicant without there being any procedural requirement that the parties inform the court of either a settlement or an intention not to proceed with the case. Civil (and commercial) non-litigious cases include proceedings not resolved inter partes, such as undefended pecuniary claims, deed poll applications, probate (grants of representation), wardship proceedings, registrations of enduring powers of attorney, appointment of care representatives, unopposed personal and corporate insolvency proceedings, liquor licencing applications and marriage notice exemption applications.
Administrative law cases are included in the number of Civil (and commercial) litigious cases.
Category "other" includes: Taxation of bills of costs, Appointment by Chief Justice of Commissioner for Oaths and Notaries Public, Persons called to the Bar; Declarations by newly appointed Judges; Extensions of service granted to District Court Judges/County Registrars; Certificates of Authentication issued.

ES: When an error is detected in the statistics of a Court, the latter is allowed doing regularization, what means that the Court communicates the correct figure and rectifies the wrong one even if this does not concord with figures offered for previous exercises. This situation can happen for example in the specific control of cases that the Court makes when a judge leaves the Court (called “alarde”), but in general, in any case in which the Judicial Counsellor detects an error that comes from previous exercises but cannot be localized. The system prefers to correct the data than continue and amplify the error. These regularizations and the cumulated cases and the re-opened cases are the causes for the horizontal inconsistencies.

CY: The reason for not having data for the subcategories of cases is that there was no electronic filing system that would enable us to have statistical data on different types of cases.

LV: Data from the first and appeal instance courts are compiled by the Court Administration, and the Court Information System is a living database that allows data to be corrected, so changes between previous periods are possible. In 2022 the increase in the balance of pending cases is related to changes in data collection, more specifically, from 2023 it is possible to determine the number of unfinished cases in non-litigious land registry cases.
In the spring of 2023, the Court Administration made improvements to the statistical data recording system, which prevented the collection of incomplete data related to the reorganization of the courts in previous periods. For these reasons, previously published data may differ and not be comparable. Within the Court Information System, submissions received in the previous year but registered the next year are considered as incoming cases for the new year. "Non-litigious business registry cases” are not defined in the Civil Code and are not within the competence of courts in the first instance. "Non-litigious land registry cases" is one of the cases which are one of the functions of district (city) courts in accordance with the Land Register Law. Examination of the Land Register matters shall be under the jurisdiction of district (city) courts.
The category “civil and commercial non-litigious cases” encompasses: applications for securing claim prior to initiation of the matter in a court; applications for securing of evidence prior to initiation of the matter in a court; applications for execution of obligations through the court; undisputed compulsory execution of obligations; execution of obligations in accordance with warning procedures; voluntary sale of immovable property at auction through the court; submitting the subject-matter of an obligation for safekeeping in the court; applications for Commercial Court adjudication execution procedures; applications for arbitrary court decision compulsory execution; applications for property protection if there is no inheritance case; applications concerning execution of court adjudications.
NL: In the Netherlands, some registers are kept by the judiciary. Those do not include a land- or business registry, see http://www.rechtspraak.nl/registers. Most registers are related to debt, bankruptcy and help or surveillance of people who are unable to handle their financial situations. Also, there is a register with ‘nevenfuncties’ (jobs and positions held by judges next to their judgeship). Mutations in these registers are not counted as court cases. The Dutch system does not count mutations in the registers as court cases, so ‘other registry cases’ is NAP.
Regarding the unavailability of the number of pending cases at the beginning of the year, since the Netherlands do not officially measure it, it is not provided.
PT: “Civil (and commercial) litigious cases”, includes the case-flow of civil justice, labour justice and juvenile justice. It does not include civil and labour enforcement cases.
SI: Category 1.Category 1. 'Civil (and commercial) litigious cases' at first instance includes: civil litigious cases at local and district courts, various civil cases at local and district courts, commercial litigious cases at district courts, labour law cases at labour courts,
social law cases at social court, various labour and social law at labour and social courts, insolvency cases including compulsory composition, bankruptcy of legal person, bankruptcy of physical person, bankruptcy of inheritance, compulsory dissolution, simplified compulsory composition and preventive restructuring at district courts.
The number includes the labour law and social law cases (before specialised labour and social law courts) due to their similarity to litigious cases in material and procedural aspects.
Category 2.1. 'General civil (and commercial) non-litigious cases'.
Category 2.2.1. 'Non litigious land registry cases' at first instance includes (at local courts): land registry cases, decisions on appeals at first instance and various land registry cases.
Category 2.2.2 'Non-litigious business registry cases ' at first instance includes (at district courts): business registry cases and various business registry cases.
Category 2.2.3. 'Other registry cases': No cases were included in this category.
Category 2.3. 'Other non-litigious cases': No cases were included in this category.
Category 3. 'Administrative law cases' at first instance include (at the Administrative court): - administrative cases and various administrative cases.
Category 4. 'Other cases'.
The above listed cases are classified into CEPEJ categories slightly differently over the years.
Inconsistencies within the tables are possible due to the peculiarity of the Supreme Court`s Data Warehouse (used in the Slovenian judiciary as the official source of data since January 1st 2012, at every court, and for providing data to the Ministry of Justice and at the Judicial Council).
It is a "live" system (dynamic reporting), meaning that the reported figures for a specific date or period of time inevitably vary for different reasons (e.g. the data was not promptly entered into the CMS; in some instances, the decision, in which category some specific new cases should be included, may be subsequently changed and when data are unified some figures change; there is also the possibility that a mistake was done when entering the data and was later detected in the quality check and corrected.)
In Data warehouse reports, every category (column in the table) is calculated (counted) separately, therefore the „Pending on 31 Dec“ may not equal to the formula (Pending 1 Jan + Incoming – Resolved) due to fore mentioned influences.
SK: For 2016 data, new methodology was implemented based on the working group’s conclusions and CEPEJ mission’s recommendation (06/2016). Former reporting structure was not consistent with the methodology of CEPEJ, which could lead to inappropriate comparison of Slovak Republic (SR) with other countries. Also, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) realized that evaluation of courts’ performance by disposed and unresolved (decided and undecided) cases is discriminating SR in comparison with other countries in European Union (EU) as this methodology is not counting a decision of first instance court as disposed until the case becomes valid. This results into reporting such case as unresolved despite respective court has already made a decision and it is no longer in its disposition how - and more importantly when - the case will be resolved (disposed) by the second instance court. This is the nature of reporting of many “unresolved” cases on courts despite court already decided, in fact. Newly proposed way of reporting extracts the numbers of decided cases in respective court instances from “unresolved” and allocates these numbers to those court instances that made an actual decision in respective time. This means that decision validity state is not being awaited for as it could potentially contain an appeal and thus also a time that a case spends on second instance court. Upon decision’s validity the case would become „disposed/resolved“ at the first instance court but most probably it would not be disposed in the same period when it was decided by the (first instance) court. This past methodology (applied by 2016) resulted (visually) in accumulation of unresolved cases while some of them were already decided by first instance court.

FI: The case management systems from which the data is collected are not static reporting tool but a dynamic and constantly changing system. So the exact number depends on the day the data is taken from the system. Part of the data here is collected on january 2023 and reflects the situation on that day. The data available is: 1)Incoming cases 2)Resolved cases 3)Cases pending on the data collection date. The number of pending cases as of 1 January has been calculated based on the available data. Because of the dynamic nature of the system, the previously annouced number of cases on 31 December and the now announced number of cases in 1 Jan will differ.

Comments on 2022 data on Other than criminal (Non-criminal) cases by countries:

BE: In relation to administrative matters, the total number of cases includes figures for the Council of State, the Council for Alien Law Litigation and the Flemish administrative courts Raad voor Vergunningsbetwistingen, het Milieuhandhavingscollege and Raad voor Verkiezingsbetwistingen. 

CZ: Pending cases on 31 Dec. ref. year: In general, the number pending cases in Czech republic is decreasing, which can be seen in the table. Administrative law cases: There is a significant and steady decrease in law administrative cases in last years. Thanks to the decreasing number of incoming cases and thanks to the increasing of the number of judges, the pending cases are rapidly decreasing.

DK: In 2022 there was still an aftermath of the unusual situation of the Covid-19 related to the periods with clos-ing down the society, including the courts. It has created more pending cases as the prosecution continued to forward new cases to the courts that could not deal with it. Land registration is the major source of in-coming cases with very large figures. It fluctuates a lot depending on interest rates, loan rescheduling etc.
2.1. General civil (and commercial) non-litigious cases: The courts have successfully reduced the number of pending cases.
As concerns "Non-litigious business registry cases", it is important that because of new regula-tions/laws, it is possible to start a new company with no prior capital. This causes many more companies and many more closures in some categories and also affect number of pending cases, like for non-litigious business registry cases. 

DE: "Non-litigous civil cases" represent non-litigous enforcement cases.
"Non-litigious business registry cases" represent - the number of registrations in the business registry (Handelsregister) at the end of the previous year
- the number of new registrations during the reference year
- the number of deleted registrations during the reference year
- the number of registrations at the end of the reference year
"Administrative law cases" include cases at the administrative, social and finance courts
"Other cases" include family cases at the local courts and cases at the labour courts (family matters are not assigned to the category civil cases, because they are subject to a different procedural law). Discrepancies in comparison with the 2020 cycle:
There has been a general decrease in incoming and resolved litigous civil cases als well as non-litigous civil cases (enforcement cases). No specific reason could be identified for this development.
EE: No comment could be provided on the variations in the caseflow between 2020 and 2022.

IE: The COVID pandemic had an effect on the courts’ ability to deal with incoming business in 2020 especially, which explains the discrepancies with number of court cases in 2022.

ES: There are increases of incoming and resolved cases compared to the number of cases in 2020. It should be taken into account that information from 2020 represents the year of the pandemic. The recovery of normal work increased the number of cases, incoming and resolved.

FR: Source: Ministry of Justice/SG/SEM/SDSE, General Civil Registry; Council of State. Following a change in methodology, the "contentious civil (and commercial) cases" now include: general litigation cases before the judicial tribunal, local court and rural leases paritarian tribunal, family matters, sales-related cases, agricultural work accidents cases, proceedings related to distressed businesses (safeguarding, reorganization and judicial liquidation) before the judicial tribunal and commercial court , judge's orders matters, liberty and detention judge matters (detention of foreigners and involuntary hospitalization), as well as social division proceedings before the judicial tribunal; ordinary procedures before the labor relations council; contentious business at the commercial court; protection of adults' affairs as well as political electoral disputes. Following the 2021 divorce reform in order to avoid any disruption in series continuity an estimate is used for 2022 (contentious civil cases and non-contentious civil cases). Due to lack of data reporting on political electoral disputes are not included in beginning or end-of-year stocks for "contentious civil and commercial cases". These represent 0.6% of completed case load in 2022. Similarly due to absence of data reporting attempts at conciliation are not included in beginning or end-of-year stocks for "non-contentious civil cases". These represent 0.6%of completed case load in 2022.Due also to lack of data reporting suits(excluding consumer code) at the local court and salary garnishments are not included in beginning or end of year stock for other cases.These represent 8.% of completed caseloads in 20 .(respectively1.%an d6%). The above explained lacks of data do not allow for complete horizontal coherence in the table.

HR: In 2022, the number of incoming Civil (and commercial) litigious cases dropped because of the unique situation from the previous cycle of a significant number of incoming collective labour cases from the public sector workers (more than 60.000 incoming cases). Since they were resolved in 2022, this has led also to a significant increase in the number of resolved cases.
Regarding General civil (and commercial) non-litigious cases, as this includes enforcement cases which have had legislative changes during 2021, a new type of case has been recorded in courts by the end of 2021, which now seems to be a permanent increase in both incoming cases and resolved cases (up from an average of 40.000 cases received and resolved every year prior to 2021 to about 60.000 cases in 2021 and 90.000 cases in 2022. These are all cases of small value that are very quick to resolve.
For non-litigious registry cases, there is a slightly bigger horizontal inconsistency due to additional corrections from the sides of courts after the official published data.

IT: In the framework of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR) Italy has undertaken a series of actions in order to reduce both disposition time and backlogs. More information about the reform can be found at https://www.italiadomani.gov.it/content/sogei-ng/it/en/Interventi/riforme/riforme-orizzontali/riforma-della-giustizia.html

CY: The total number of resolved cases has increased as there was an increase in the number of judges. Administrative law cases include the cases filled at the Administrative court of international protection.

LV: In 2022 the increase in the balance of pending cases is related to changes in data collection, more specifically, from 2023 it is possible to determine the number of unfinished cases in non-litigious land registry cases.
The number of pending cases on Jan. and on 31.Dec. is higher than 2020 year due high number of pending non-litigious cases. Every year from 2019, significant increase in the number of non-litigious civil cases has been observed. Compared to the 2020, the number of incoming cases and resolved cases increased significantly. The increase of incoming cases and resolved cases of non-litigious civil cases affected increase of pending cases. In the end of 2021, amendments to the Civil Procedure Law entered into force, which made it easier to submit applications for enforcement of obligations according to warning procedures, these changes contributed to the increase in the number of non-litigious cases received. Civil Procedure Law determines that the judge shall, within seven days take a decision The short case review period contributes to that the number of received and completed cases is similar. The number of pending cases (pending for more then 2 years) has decreased. The reduction of pending cases is related to the increased interest and pressure of the public, the Council of Justice and the Ministry of Justice to reduce the number of long pending civil and administrative cases.

LT: 2.1. The duration of court hearings is influenced by the number of new cases received at the court and the number of working judges who hear these cases (judge workload), the type or type of the case and its complexity, the cases specified in the law when the hearing must be postponed (e.g. by a party to the proceedings disease etc.). It should be noted that in 2022, 705 judges worked in Lithuanian courts (of which 2 judges were appointed for 2 years), 786 judge positions, that is, 81 positions were not filled, which could lead to a larger balance of unexamined cases at the end of the year. It is noteworthy that in 2022 compared to 2021, the number of civil cases examined in district and district courts (first instance) increased by 1.7%.
3. A significant change in received and examined administrative cases compared to 2021 was due to an increase in the number of administrative cases due to the issuance of a court order, when waste system administrators, due to the increased number of debtors, go to court with requests for the local fee for the collection and management of municipal waste, debt recovery, as well as there has been a significant increase in asylum cases due to the illegal migration crisis in the country.
For registry cases, the answer should be NA, the NAP was chosen for the calculation purposes: it is not possible to identify those cases among all other general civil cases.
Other cases: In 2022, compared to 2021, the number of cases of administrative offenses examined in district courts decreased significantly - by 65% compared to 2020. – decreased by as much as 76%. These changes were caused by changes to the Code of Administrative Offenses, which entered into force in 2021-07-01 and in which certain cases of administrative offenses were transferred from district courts to be examined by non-judicial institutions.

LU: The decrease in the number of non-contentious cases brought before the courts can be attributed to a legislative change in 2021, which raised the jurisdictional threshold from €10,000 to €15,000 in favour of the justices of the peace (https://legilux.public.lu/eli/etat/leg/loi/2021/07/15/a541/jo). This change has resulted in a reduction in both new cases filed and cases concluded by the courts, as certain matters that would have traditionally been brought before the courts are now within the purview of justices of the peace since 2021.

MT: In 2022, there was an overall increase in the caseload of the civil courts when compared to the previous evaluation, primarily because this data reflects the normal caseload following the Covid-19 pandemic. Having said this, during this year there was also one specific 1st instance court that has registered an exponential increase in the incoming caseload as a result of legislative issues. This increase in the incoming caseload was reflected in a modest increase in the resolved caseload, but had a more pronounced effect on the pending caseload.

NL: In previous years, we were able to produce the number of incoming and pending cases for categories 1, 2, and 2.1, but not this year. The Judiciary has decided on a different norm for one of the components needed for this number, so these numbers are no longer available as of 2022.

AT: Starting from 2022, “non-litigious family matters” are taken into consideration in the category “general civil non-litigious cases”, while before they were communicated in “other”.

PL: Administrative law cases - In 2022, the number of incoming administrative cases decreased compared to the previous year. The number of incoming complaints about the inaction of public administration bodies and the protracted conduct of proceedings by these bodies also decreased. The decrease in the receipt of such complaints in 2022 was 30.2% compared to 2021. This may be indicative of the catching up of public administration activities caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. Data for the next years will show whether the downward trend will continue.

PT: “Civil (and commercial) litigious cases”, includes the case-flow of civil justice, labour justice and juvenile justice. It does not include civil and labour enforcement cases.
On 1 September 2013, the new Code of civil Procedure entered into force, establishing a new regime for the enforcement action in Portugal, based on a new paradigm, which states that the processes that run in court must stand out clearly – those who are dependent on the commission of an act of the judge or the secretary – from those who run out of court. This new model, which enables a new way of organizing tasks, of work monitoring and of differentiating responsibilities is provided for in Article 551, paragraph 5 of the new Code of Civil Procedure. This new system follows more closely the current model in other countries and, without prejudice to the specificities of each planning and method of statistical production, will facilitate the future approach to a comparison of the Portuguese system with that of other countries
From a statistical point of view, this new model has not yet however been reflected in numbers, as work is still ongoing aimed at demarcating the procedures that are in court, waiting for an act, from those that are being handled by other entities. Since is not yet possible to provide figures that reflect the amount of work take non by the courts as referred above, the data does not include civil and labour enforcement cases. The number of enforcement cases for the year 2022 are: Pending cases on 1 Jan. 2022: 394367; Incoming cases: 108036; Resolved cases: 140946; Pending cases on 31 Dec. 2022: 361457. This numbers correspond to the total number of existing procedures in Portugal in 2022, following the existing model prior to the entry into force of the said legal diploma.
For this reason, the alerts and notes transmitted in previous years with regard to comparisons between countries still remain. A comparative Reading of these values must, as we have repeatedly drawn attention, be very cautious, refraining from any comparison in terms of volume or duration of cases and should be limited to the evaluation of the development indicators.
“Administrative law cases”, includes administrative and tax cases. The number of Pending cases on 1 Jan. that correspond only to tax cases is 38089. The number Incoming cases that correspond only to tax cases is 11619. The number of Resolved cases that correspond only to tax cases is 14888. The number of Pending cases on 31 Dec. That correspond only to tax cases is 34820. In what concerns this type of cases, in 2022 there were 24,212 new cases and 27,051 completed cases. However, of these totals, only 23,483 new cases and 26,322 completed cases corresponded to real movements of the beginning and end of cases. The remaining 729 cases refer to cases that were internally transferred between units.

RO: There are no explanations for the discrepancies, as for volumes of cases in the order of hundreds no conclusions can be drawn regarding statistical trends.

SK: Discrepancy between the pending cases on 31 Dec. 2021 and the pending cases on 1 Jan. ref. year in the line 1. and Total is due to an administrative error caused by the court. In the rest lines, there is no discrepancy between the pending cases on 31 Dec. 2021 and the pending cases on 1 Jan. ref. year (compared with the previous year). A significant increase in the Business registry cases category in 2022 (comparing incoming and resolved to 2020) is related to legislative changes to Act no. 530/2003 Coll. on the Commercial Register. The amendment to the law - included the birth-number among the recorded data with the aim of unambiguously identifying natural persons registered in the business register. In the case that it was not possible to add this data automatically from other reference sources into the the business register, it had to be added based on a court proposal submitted by September 30, 2022 (increase in incoming cases). Other discrepancies are reflection either of the submission activity of the public (incoming cases) or productivity of the judicial system itself - in resolved cases.

SE: Migration cases are included in administrative law cases. 
Filed civil cases excluding joint petitions decreased during 2022 mainly due to lower amounts of family cases and small claims cases cases (so called "FT cases"). From 2022 there is a new law regarding information conversations that may have affected the family cases. Filed joint petitions decreased by two percent. Civil cases pending decreased for the second year in a row, by three percent. Migration cases are included in administrative law cases. The administrative courts (including migration cases) had the highest amount ever of cases filed 2020. During 2021 and 2022 cases decreased compared to this, by 14 percent the recent year. All the twelve courts had lower amounts of filed cases. Also cases resolved decreased by 14 percent. Pending cases decreased by ten percent. Although, the proportion of cases pending older than 6 months and 12 months increased compared to previous year which is a negative development. For the migration cases there was a decline of cases filed from previous year with 18 percent, of which asylum cases decreased with 22%. Resolved migration cases also decreased with 21% but were higher than the number of cases filed which resulted in a lower number of pending migration cases than last year, a decrease of 2% of which asylum cases decreased with 27%. The proportion of pending cases older than 6 months and 12 months decreased.

See 10.6.7. Documentation on methodology for the Non-Criminal cases

See 10.6.7. Documentation on methodology for the Non-Criminal cases

In addition to the methodology developed by CEPEJ (see 10.6), CEPEJ provides a specific data collection within the study delivered annually to European Commission for the EU Justice Scoreboard. Documentation on CEPEJ methodology for this annual study on the functioning of judicial systems in the EU Member States including methodological note can be found in the Study on the functioning of judicial systems in the EU Member States - Facts and figures from the CEPEJ questionnaires 2012 to 2021 and CEPEJ website 

Data are provided by the European Commission for the efficiency of justice  (CEPEJ) of the Council of Europe

No assessment has been made.

Data are required for the EU Justice Scoreboard

Not assessed.

Some data are not available (":") for certain categories/countries and years. Some data are not applicable (":z", "m" since 2025) for certain categories/countries and years.

":" (information/data is not available) means that the concept/category referred to exists in respective state, but the information/data is not known (e.g., administrative law cases exist but their number cannot be quantified).
":z" ("m" since 2025) (not applicable) means that the concept/category referred to does not exists in respective state (for example, a court related mediation doesn’t exist as a possibility in the State).

The completeness in terms of number of countries for each indicator is shown in the following table. 

Court statistics reflect the number of cases processed by the courts. However, the type of cases within the different CEPEJ categories with which courts deal can differ in the countries. The specifics of some countries are described in the general and specific comments (See 10.6).

Not applicable. Data are from administrative records.

Not applicable.

Data from administrative records are likely to contain some random errors (mistakes) as well as systematic errors (bias).

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Data collected from the justice system sum up cases recorded over the course of a year, usually from the 1st of January to the 31st of December of the reference year. The data for the reference year Y are disseminated at Y+17 months, after a process of collection, quality check and only after the publication of the EU Justice Scoreboard by European Commission (see 8.1).

Data are released approximately 17 months after the reference year, only after the publication of the EU Justice Scoreboard.

Not applicable as there is only one release.

No delay in 2024.

No delay in 2024.

As countries records information primarily for their own administrative purposes, the data and methods they use may vary. However, countries should provide data in accordance with the CEPEJ methodology to ensure comparability of data from different judicial systems. This consistency and comparability is checked during the quality check process carried on by CEPEJ Secretariat. Any discrepancies from the CEPEJ definitions are described in the comments in 10.6.

Not applicable.

CEPEJ is providing data to Eurostat starting with 2022 year of reference. Eventual changes in future that might introduce breaks in the time series from the side of data providers or eventual changes in CEPEJ methodology (within questionnaire/explanatory note) will be noted and registered in the countries’ comments.  These are also indicated by the flag ‘b’ for values in the datasets.

The current comparable time series starts in 2022. The time series on Legal cases processed in first instance courts by legal status of the court process (criminal, civil/commercial litigious and non litigious, administrative and other non criminal) collected by Eurostat is available from 2008 since 2022. Current data can be based on different definitions and cannot be directly compared with the data published at a national level up to 2022.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

The internal coherence of the data is checked with basic validation rules (see section 18.4. Data validation). Figures for categories may not add up to the total, because information for some categories is unknown (see CEPEJ methodological principles in 10.6). 

The dissemination of CEPEJ data avoids duplication of data collection by Eurostat and unnecessary response burden for the data providers. 

To further specify the general Eurostat revision policy, the following revision policy has been established for the crime domain. Revisions to the data are possible at any time, but only based on new data received from CEPEJ.

The revision practice effectively corresponds to the revision practice of the domain listed under sub‑concept 17.1 (data revision – policy). All reported errors (once validated) result in corrections of the disseminated data. Reported errors are corrected in the disseminated data as soon as the correct data have been validated. Data are only published once they are deemed to be sufficiently complete for all data providers. Whenever new data are provided and validated, the already disseminated data are updated. Data are usually revised for the previous two years. Aggregates and components are revised at the same time.

Not applicable.

The first instance courts statistics published annually are derived from administrative sources covering courts of the justice system. The source data type is the data recorded in the administrative registers.

Annual

Since 2008 up to 2022 data, Eurostat annually collected data on first instance cases for 38 jurisdictions (41 jurisdiction until 2019 data collection) through a questionnaire that was sent to a national contact point responsible for distributing the questionnaire to the appropriate data producers in the jurisdiction. The national contact point was then responsible for returning a completed and consolidated response to Eurostat. Since 2022 data, data are povided to Eurostat by CEPEJ and disseminated in a different dataset.

Each state designates national correspondents to collect the relevant data in respect of its system and deliver them to the CEPEJ. The national correspondents are the main interlocutors of the CEPEJ Secretariat in providing data and ensuring the quality and reliability of the data. According to the defined methodology, CEPEJ works in full trust and transparency with the national correspondent through continuous dialogue. The CEPEJ Secretariat verifies the quality and consistency of the data submitted by each correspondent in the light of the CEPEJ's own methodology of presentation of data (“quality check process”). This process improves the quality, availability, comparability and the comprehensibility of the data. CEPEJ will publish only the data which reaches a high level of quality.
The functioning and the peculiarities of each judicial system are explained in the comments provided by the correspondent (see 10.6). According to the CEPEJ methodology, all data should be read and analysed jointly with the comments (general and specific) provided by the correspondents. The questionnaire and explanatory note are the main tools used in CEPEJ data collection and are designed to support the national correspondent in providing comparable data. (https://www.coe.int/en/web/cepej/cepej-work/evaluation-of-judicial-systems)
For more detailed information on the data quality check process, please consult the CEPEJ Explanatory note to the scheme for evaluating European judicial systems available at https://rm.coe.int/explanatory-note-2024-cycle-cepej-2023-2-en/1680aae30a

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.