In the light of the European standards, it is necessary to introduce periodical evaluation of the judges. Its introduction causes diff erent opinions in the milieu of the judges and in the doctrine. The previous work of judges is evaluated during visitations, audits, grievance fi led under administrative supervisions. Each judge promotion is preceded by overview and detailed by analysis of the lecture. According to many judges, implementation the additional, permanent assessment is unreasonable. At the moment the problem is not the lack of periodic evaluations, but the lack of clear and legible criteria for promotion. Diff erent positions represent the environment created by the President of the Supreme Court, which considers that the judges work should be subject to periodic evaluations.