Mexico vs New Zealand: Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6)
Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) over time
- Mexico
- New Zealand
How they compare
Mexico currently reports 3.34 DB16-20 methodology against 3 DB16-20 methodology in New Zealand, a difference of 0.34 DB16-20 methodology.
That makes Mexico's figure about 1.1 times New Zealand's.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Mexico has been ahead every year.
Mexico ranks 42nd and New Zealand ranks 43rd of 188 countries.
Mexico has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: case management (0-6), Mexico or New Zealand?
- Mexico, at 3.34 DB16-20 methodology against 3 DB16-20 methodology in New Zealand as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) between Mexico and New Zealand?
- 0.34 DB16-20 methodology, with Mexico ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mexico and New Zealand?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do Mexico and New Zealand rank globally for enforcing contracts: case management (0-6)?
- Mexico ranks 42nd and New Zealand ranks 43rd of 188 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The case management evaluates six aspects of the court case management system: (i) whether there are regulations setting time standards for key court events; (ii) whether there are regulations on adjournments and continuances; (iii) whether performance measurement reports are publicly available; (iv) whether a pretrial conference is available; (v) whether an electronic case management system for judges is available; and (vi) whether an electronic case management system for lawyers is available. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.