Barbados vs Cyprus: Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5)

Barbados
3 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Cyprus
3 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Barbados rank
94th
Cyprus rank
94th

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

  • Barbados
  • Cyprus
0123201520172019

How they compare

Barbados currently reports 3 DB17-20 methodology against 3 DB17-20 methodology in Cyprus, a difference of 0 DB17-20 methodology.

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

Barbados ranks 94th and Cyprus ranks 94th of 188 countries.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5), Barbados or Cyprus?
Barbados, at 3 DB17-20 methodology against 3 DB17-20 methodology in Cyprus as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5) between Barbados and Cyprus?
0 DB17-20 methodology, with Barbados ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Barbados and Cyprus?
5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
How do Barbados and Cyprus rank globally for enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5)?
Barbados ranks 94th and Cyprus ranks 94th of 188 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

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.