Mongolia vs South Sudan, Republic of: Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5)

Mongolia
1.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
South Sudan, Republic of
1.5 DB17-20 methodology
in 2019
Mongolia rank
171st
South Sudan, Republic of rank
171st

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

  • Mongolia
  • South Sudan, Republic of
00.511.5201520172019

How they compare

Mongolia currently reports 1.5 DB17-20 methodology against 1.5 DB17-20 methodology in South Sudan, Republic of, a difference of 0 DB17-20 methodology.

Across all 5 years both countries report, South Sudan, Republic of has been ahead every year.

Mongolia ranks 171st and South Sudan, Republic of ranks 171st of 190 countries.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5), Mongolia or South Sudan, Republic of?
Mongolia, at 1.5 DB17-20 methodology against 1.5 DB17-20 methodology in South Sudan, Republic of as of 2019.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5) between Mongolia and South Sudan, Republic of?
0 DB17-20 methodology, with Mongolia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and South Sudan, Republic of?
5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
How do Mongolia and South Sudan, Republic of rank globally for enforcing contracts: court structure and proceedings (0-5)?
Mongolia ranks 171st and South Sudan, Republic of ranks 171st 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

Mongolia vs South Sudan, Republic of: Enforcing contracts: Court structure and proceedings (0-5). Statizoid. Retrieved 18 August 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/enforcing-contracts-court-structure-and-proceedings-0-5-db17-20-methodology/mongolia/south-sudan/

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/mongolia/south-sudan/">Mongolia vs South Sudan, Republic of: 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.