The paper analyses judicial system of the Republic of Serbia through a comparative review of judicial systems of other European countries and on the basis of the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (SEPEJ) report European Judicial Systems Edition 2008 (data 2006), which contains data collected from 45 member states of the European Council. The areas of comparative analysis are the following: judicial systems financing (including salary levels of judges and prosecutors), the number of courts and geographical locations of courts, the necessary number of professional judges and the number of incoming and solved cases in civil litigious and nonlitigious cases (clearance rate). The paper concludes that the level of efficiency of Serbian courts in solving litigious and non-litigious cases in 2006 was higher than in the majority of European countries. The number of geographical locations of courts was also higher than the European average, which justifies the ongoing measures with respect to rationalization of the court network in Serbia. The number of professional judges in Serbia in 2006 was also higher than the European average, but due to a different organizational and personal structure of European states’ judicial systems (in which non-professional judges and other bodies are authorized to decide in various kinds of less complex cases) the issue of the necessary number of judges has to be analysed cautiously and in much more depth in order to enable effective functioning of the overall judicial system in Serbia.U radu se analizira stanje u pravosudnom sistemu Republike Srbije kroz poređenje sa drugim evropskim zemljama na osnovu izveštaja Evropske komisije za efikasnost pravosuđa (SEPEŽ) »Evropski sudski sistemi« od 2008. godine, koji sadrži podatke prikupljene od 45 zemalja članica Saveta Evrope iz 2006. godine. Oblasti komparativne analize su: finansiranje pravosudnih sistema (uključujući i nivo plata sudija i tužilaca), broj sudova i geografskih lokacija sudova, neophodan broj profesionalnih sudija i broj primljenih i rešenih predmeta u parničnim i van-parničnim sporovima (stepen ažurnosti). U radu se zaključuje da je stanje u srpskom pravosuđu u 2006. godini u pogledu efikasnosti i ažurnosti rada sudova u rešavanju parničnih i vanparničnih predmeta bilo bolje nego u većini evropskih zemalja. Broj geografskih lokacija sudova, sa druge strane, bio je iznad evropskog proseka, što opravdava preduzete mere u pogledu racionalizacije mreže sudova koja je trenutno u toku. Broj profesonalnih sudija je u 2006. godini takođe bio iznad evropskog proseka, ali se zbog različitog uređenja pojedinačnih pravosudnih sistema evropskih zemalja (u kojima su neprofesionalne sudije ili tela ovlašćena da rešavaju u različitim vrstama manje složenih predmeta) razmatranje neophodnog broja sudija mora mnogo dublje analizirati da bi se ustanovio realno potreban broj, kako bi se obezbedilo nesmetano funkcionisanje celokupnog pravosudnog sistema
