Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership

Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership is a law firm operating in Singapore. With documented cases from 2001 to 2003. The firm has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Supported by a team of 2 counsels. The firm demonstrates particular expertise in breach of contract and divorce. Their track record shows a 66.7% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex cases, representing 33.3% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated expertise across 10 primary practice areas, with significant experience in administrative law and breach of contract.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Administrative Law	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	General Practice40.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	Experienced50.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	Experienced50.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	Experienced65.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Corporate Governance	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	General Practice30.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	General Practice30.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Divorce	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.
Products Liability	1 cases	8.3% of total caseload	Experienced50.00% relevance score	Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 8.3% of their total caseload.

Legal Team and Representation

Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership has 2 notable counsels who have represented clients in various cases. The most active counsel has handled 3 cases.

Counsel Name	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Raymond Lye	3 cases	100.0% of firm's cases	2003 sghc 179(Aug 2003)
Alvin Chang	2 cases	66.7% of firm's cases	2001 sgca 48(Jun 2001) 2001 sghc 133(Jun 2001)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 19.8
Complex Cases: 1 (33.3%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Won	221.3 parties avg	21.3	66.7%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	33.3%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2001	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2003	123.0 parties avg	23.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Won	2(66.7%)	66.7%
Partial	1(33.3%)	33.3%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0	0.003 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2001	011 11	Partial: 1 cases (9.1%) Won: 1 cases (9.1%)
2003	01 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Represented Parties

List of parties represented by Tay Lye & Ngaw Partnership in various cases

Party Name	Role	Cases	Outcomes
Ang Yong ChoonDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Chew Chi YongDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Chiam Shiun PhenpDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Chow Kok HiangDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Chua Hock SingDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Heah Ah LickDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Koh Chin TeeDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Lee Chin KiawDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Lee Thiam ChaiDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Lim Koh BengDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Luah Sing HengDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Neo Kui HockDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Neo Lian HuatDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Neo Lye SiahDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Ng Beng TwanDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Ng Kim HockDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Ng Peng HockDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Ong Teck TiongDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Seah Phiak CheowDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Singapore School Transport AssociationDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Tan Nam SoonDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Wong Ann LinDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Chew Kim HengRespondent Partial (1)	Respondent	1 case	Partial (1)
Anti-Corrosion Pte LtdDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

Case

2003-sghc-179

24 Aug 2003

Ang Yong ChoonWon

Chew Chi YongWon

Chiam Shiun PhenpWon

Chow Kok HiangWon

Chua Hock SingWon

Heah Ah LickWon

Koh Chin TeeWon

Lee Chin KiawWon

Lee Thiam ChaiWon

Lim Koh BengWon

Luah Sing HengWon

Neo Kui HockWon

Neo Lian HuatWon

Neo Lye SiahWon

Ng Beng TwanWon

Ng Kim HockWon

Ng Peng HockWon

Ong Teck TiongWon

Seah Phiak CheowWon

Singapore School Transport AssociationWon

Tan Nam SoonWon

Wong Ann LinWon

Won	Ang Yong Choon (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Chew Chi Yong (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Chiam Shiun Phenp (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Chow Kok Hiang (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Chua Hock Sing (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Heah Ah Lick (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Koh Chin Tee (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Lee Chin Kiaw (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Lee Thiam Chai (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Lim Koh Beng (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Luah Sing Heng (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Neo Kui Hock (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Neo Lian Huat (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Neo Lye Siah (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Ng Beng Twan (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Ng Kim Hock (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Ng Peng Hock (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Ong Teck Tiong (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Seah Phiak Cheow (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Singapore School Transport Association (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Tan Nam Soon (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
Won	Wong Ann Lin (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court ruled in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's application. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.

2001-sgca-48

21 Jun 2001

Chew Kim HengPartial

2001-sghc-133

13 Jun 2001

Anti-Corrosion Pte LtdWon