Armenia vs Montenegro: Enforcing contracts: Procedures

Armenia
49 number
in 2014
Montenegro
49 number
in 2014
Armenia rank
8th
Montenegro rank
8th

Enforcing contracts: Procedures over time

  • Armenia
  • Montenegro
01020304050200320082014

How they compare

Armenia currently reports 49 number against 49 number in Montenegro, a difference of 0 number.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 9 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Armenia ahead.

Armenia ranks 8th and Montenegro ranks 8th of 181 countries.

Armenia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Armenia Montenegro Difference Ahead
2000s 49.5 number 49 number 0.5 number Armenia
2010s 49 number 49 number 0 number

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: procedures, Armenia or Montenegro?
Armenia, at 49 number against 49 number in Montenegro as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures between Armenia and Montenegro?
0 number, with Armenia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Armenia and Montenegro?
9 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2014.
How do Armenia and Montenegro rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures?
Armenia ranks 8th and Montenegro ranks 8th of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Enforcing contracts: Procedures (number)
Unit
number
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 2,113 data points, 2003–2014
Last refreshed

The procedures to enforce contracts records the list of procedural steps compiled for each economy that traces the chronology of a commercial dispute before the relevant court. A procedure is defined as any interaction, required by law or commonly carried out in practice, between the parties or between them and the judge or court officer. The component indicator is computed based on the methodology in the DB04-15 studies.