Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) in Uruguay
Uruguay: Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ▬ Flat
Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) in Uruguay, 2015–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
Uruguay recorded 3 DB16-20 methodology for enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) in 2019. That is the highest value across all 5 years on record.
The figure is unchanged over five years.
Uruguay ranks 43rd of 191 countries on this measure, in the top quarter.
Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) in Uruguay, year by year
| Year | DB16-20 methodology | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | — |
| 2016 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2017 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2018 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
| 2019 | 3 DB16-20 methodology | +0.0% |
Uruguay compared with similar countries
- Uruguay's 3 DB16-20 methodology is above the median for high income countries, which is 3 DB16-20 methodology, 1.0× the median. (62 countries reporting)
- Uruguay's 3 DB16-20 methodology is above the median for Latin America & Caribbean, which is 2 DB16-20 methodology, 1.5× the median. (33 countries reporting)
Countries ranked near Uruguay
- 42 Mexico 3.34 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Brazil 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Antigua and Barbuda 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Armenia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Azerbaijan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Bahrain 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Bhutan 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Cape Verde 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Czechia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Dominica 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 France 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Grenada 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Mauritius 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Moldova 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 New Zealand 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Slovenia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Saint Kitts and Nevis 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Saint Lucia 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 43 Ukraine 3 DB16-20 methodology compare
More reference data data for Uruguay
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.2999 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 4.87 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 6.98 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.3685 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 6.98 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 1.01 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.2195 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 24.48 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 33.62 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 2.01 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) in Uruguay?
- Enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) in Uruguay was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) recorded in Uruguay?
- The highest recorded value was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2015.
- What is the lowest enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) recorded in Uruguay?
- The lowest recorded value was 3 DB16-20 methodology in 2015.
- How does Uruguay rank for enforcing contracts: case management (0-6)?
- Uruguay ranks 43rd out of 191 countries with data for 2019.
- Where does this Uruguay data come from?
- The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.
Download this data
CSV · JSON — 5 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).
About this data
The case management evaluates six aspects of the court case management system: (i) whether there are regulations setting time standards for key court events; (ii) whether there are regulations on adjournments and continuances; (iii) whether performance measurement reports are publicly available; (iv) whether a pretrial conference is available; (v) whether an electronic case management system for judges is available; and (vi) whether an electronic case management system for lawyers is available. The index is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.