Nigeria vs Sri Lanka: Enforcing contracts: Procedures

Nigeria
40.23 number
in 2014
Sri Lanka
40 number
in 2014
Nigeria rank
59th
Sri Lanka rank
60th

Enforcing contracts: Procedures over time

  • Nigeria
  • Sri Lanka
010203040200320082014

How they compare

Nigeria currently reports 40.23 number against 40 number in Sri Lanka, a difference of 0.23 number.

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

Nigeria ranks 59th and Sri Lanka ranks 60th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Nigeria Sri Lanka Difference Ahead
2000s 40.43 number 40 number 0.4286 number Nigeria
2010s 40.09 number 40 number 0.092 number Nigeria

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher enforcing contracts: procedures, Nigeria or Sri Lanka?
Nigeria, at 40.23 number against 40 number in Sri Lanka as of 2014.
What is the difference in enforcing contracts: procedures between Nigeria and Sri Lanka?
0.23 number, with Nigeria ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Nigeria and Sri Lanka?
12 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2014.
How do Nigeria and Sri Lanka rank globally for enforcing contracts: procedures?
Nigeria ranks 59th and Sri Lanka 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.