Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) in Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan: Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019. ◆ Volatile
Enforcing contracts: Case management (0-6) in Uzbekistan, 2015–2019
Source: World Bank. Measured in DB16-20 methodology.
Analysis
In 2019, enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) in Uzbekistan stood at 1 DB16-20 methodology. That is the highest value across all 5 years on record.
Uzbekistan ranks 114th of 188 countries on this measure, in the middle of the range.
Countries ranked near Uzbekistan
- 113 Pakistan 1.15 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Bangladesh 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Japan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Afghanistan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Bahamas 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Barbados 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Belgium 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Benin 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Burkina Faso 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Cambodia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Ethiopia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Ghana 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Iran 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Ireland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Kiribati 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Kuwait 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Kyrgyzstan 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Lesotho 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Luxembourg 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Mauritania 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Micronesia (country) 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Mongolia 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Myanmar 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Niger 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Oman 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Panama 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 San Marino 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Senegal 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Seychelles 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Sri Lanka 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Switzerland 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 East Timor 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Tonga 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Vanuatu 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Vietnam 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
- 114 Zimbabwe 1 DB16-20 methodology compare
More reference data data for Uzbekistan
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 1.49 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.2736 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 8.86 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Burning - Crop re 8.84 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Agricultural Soil 9,689 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 41.77 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Crop Residues 394.71 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 10.02 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 5.17 (2050)
- Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Burning - Crop residues 0.0334 (2050)
Frequently asked questions
- What is enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) in Uzbekistan?
- Enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) in Uzbekistan was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019, according to the World Bank.
- What is the highest enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) recorded in Uzbekistan?
- The highest recorded value was 1 DB16-20 methodology in 2019.
- What is the lowest enforcing contracts: case management (0-6) recorded in Uzbekistan?
- The lowest recorded value was 0 DB16-20 methodology in 2015.
- How does Uzbekistan rank for enforcing contracts: case management (0-6)?
- Uzbekistan ranks 114th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
- Where does this Uzbekistan 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.