Denmark vs Estonia: Enforcing contracts: Procedures

Denmark
35 number
in 2014
Estonia
35 number
in 2014
Denmark rank
120th
Estonia rank
120th

Enforcing contracts: Procedures over time

  • Denmark
  • Estonia
010203040200320082014

How they compare

Denmark currently reports 35 number against 35 number in Estonia, a difference of 0 number.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 12 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Estonia ahead.

Denmark ranks 120th and Estonia ranks 120th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Denmark Estonia Difference Ahead
2000s 34.86 number 34.14 number 0.7143 number Denmark
2010s 35 number 35 number 0 number

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: procedures, Denmark or Estonia?
Denmark, at 35 number against 35 number in Estonia as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures between Denmark and Estonia?
0 number, with Denmark ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Denmark and Estonia?
12 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2014.
How do Denmark and Estonia rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures?
Denmark ranks 120th and Estonia ranks 120th 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.