Antigua and Barbuda vs Austria: Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5)

Antigua and Barbuda
4.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Austria
4.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Antigua and Barbuda rank
14th
Austria rank
14th

Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5) over time

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Austria
012345201520172019

How they compare

Antigua and Barbuda currently reports 4.5 DB17-20 methodology against 4.5 DB17-20 methodology in Austria, a difference of 0 DB17-20 methodology.

Across all 5 years both countries report, Austria has been ahead every year.

Antigua and Barbuda ranks 14th and Austria ranks 14th of 190 countries.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5), Antigua and Barbuda or Austria?
Antigua and Barbuda, at 4.5 DB17-20 methodology against 4.5 DB17-20 methodology in Austria as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5) between Antigua and Barbuda and Austria?
0 DB17-20 methodology, with Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Antigua and Barbuda and Austria?
5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
How do Antigua and Barbuda and Austria rank globally for enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5)?
Antigua and Barbuda ranks 14th and Austria ranks 14th of 190 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5) (DB17-20 methodology). 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

Antigua and Barbuda vs Austria: Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5). Statizoid. Retrieved 20 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/enforcing-contracts-court-structure-and-proceedings-0-5-db17-20-methodology/antigua-and-barbuda/austria/

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-court-structure-and-proceedings-0-5-db17-20-methodology/antigua-and-barbuda/austria/">Antigua and Barbuda vs Austria: Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5) (DB17-20 methodology)
Unit
DB17-20 methodology
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 950 data points, 2015–2019
Last refreshed

The court structure and proceedings evaluates five aspects of the court system: (i) whether a specialized commercial court, division or section is available; (ii) whether a small claims court and/or simplified procedure for small claims is available; (iii) whether pretrial attachment of defendant's movable assets is available; (iv) whether new cases are assigned randomly and through an automated system to judges; and (v) whether a woman’s testimony in court carries the same evidentiary weight as that of a man's. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.