Kazakhstan vs Chinese Taipei: Enforcing contracts: Court automation (0-4)
Enforcing contracts: Court automation (0-4) over time
- Kazakhstan
- Chinese Taipei
How they compare
Kazakhstan currently reports 3 DB17-20 methodology against 3 DB17-20 methodology in Chinese Taipei, a difference of 0 DB17-20 methodology.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Chinese Taipei has been ahead every year.
Kazakhstan ranks 13th and Chinese Taipei ranks 13th of 190 countries.
Chinese Taipei has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: court automation (0-4), Kazakhstan or Chinese Taipei?
- Kazakhstan, at 3 DB17-20 methodology against 3 DB17-20 methodology in Chinese Taipei as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: court automation (0-4) between Kazakhstan and Chinese Taipei?
- 0 DB17-20 methodology, with Kazakhstan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kazakhstan and Chinese Taipei?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do Kazakhstan and Chinese Taipei rank globally for enforcing contracts: court automation (0-4)?
- Kazakhstan ranks 13th and Chinese Taipei ranks 13th of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Court automation (0-4) (DB17-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The court automation evaluates four aspects: (i) whether the initial complaint can be filed electronically; (ii) whether the initial complaint can be served electronically; (iii) whether court fees can be paid electronically; and (iv) whether judgments rendered in commercial matters are made available to the public. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.