Eswatini vs Guinea-Bissau: Enforcing contracts: Procedures

Eswatini
40 number
in 2014
Guinea-Bissau
40 number
in 2014
Eswatini rank
60th
Guinea-Bissau rank
60th

Enforcing contracts: Procedures over time

  • Eswatini
  • Guinea-Bissau
010203040200520092014

How they compare

Eswatini currently reports 40 number against 40 number in Guinea-Bissau, a difference of 0 number.

Across all 10 years both countries report, Guinea-Bissau has been ahead every year.

Eswatini ranks 60th and Guinea-Bissau ranks 60th of 181 countries.

Guinea-Bissau has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Eswatini Guinea-Bissau Difference Ahead
2000s 40 number 41 number 1 number Guinea-Bissau
2010s 40 number 40 number 0 number

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: procedures, Eswatini or Guinea-Bissau?
Eswatini, at 40 number against 40 number in Guinea-Bissau as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures between Eswatini and Guinea-Bissau?
0 number, with Eswatini ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Eswatini and Guinea-Bissau?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Eswatini and Guinea-Bissau rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures?
Eswatini ranks 60th and Guinea-Bissau ranks 60th 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.