Abstract
The author empirically examines adjudication in the proceedings on constitutional complaints in three substantive areas. The article seeks to find out whether there are any differences in the adjudication among the Constitutional Court justices.
When differences are identified, the article aims to examine the influence of selected non-legal factors using the method of substitute variables; the substitute variables are the justice's gender and the president who appointed the justice. The results of the analysis indicate that in the adjudication there are indeed substantial differences among the individual justices which cannot be explained by the gender of the justice, but a certain correlation can be observed between the justice's decisions and the opinions of the appointing president.