Malta vs Tunisia: Enforcing contracts: Cost

Malta
21.5%
in 2019
Tunisia
21.8%
in 2019
Malta rank
146th
Tunisia rank
143rd

Enforcing contracts: Cost over time

  • Malta
  • Tunisia
05101520200320112019

How they compare

Tunisia currently reports 21.8% against 21.5% in Malta, a difference of 0.3%.

Across all 9 years both countries report, Tunisia has been ahead every year.

Malta ranks 146th and Tunisia ranks 143rd of 190 countries.

Tunisia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: cost, Malta or Tunisia?
Tunisia, at 21.8% against 21.5% in Malta as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: cost between Malta and Tunisia?
0.3%, with Tunisia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Malta and Tunisia?
9 years are reported by both, from 2011 to 2019.
How do Malta and Tunisia rank globally for enforcing contracts: cost?
Malta ranks 146th and Tunisia ranks 143rd of 190 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Malta vs Tunisia: Enforcing contracts: Cost. Statizoid. Retrieved 18 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/enforcing-contracts-cost-percent-of-claim-2/malta/tunisia/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/enforcing-contracts-cost-percent-of-claim-2/malta/tunisia/">Malta vs Tunisia: Enforcing contracts: Cost</a> β€” Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim)
Unit
% of claim
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 3,083 data points, 2003–2019
Last refreshed

The cost to enforce contracts is recorded as a percentage of the claim value, assumed to be equivalent to 200% of income per capita or $5,000, whichever is greater. Three types of costs are recorded: average attorney fees, court costs and enforcement costs. Bribes are not taken into account.