William Chai & Rama

William Chai & Rama is a law firm operating in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2006. The firm has handled 9 cases in Singapore's courts. Supported by a team of 10 counsels. The firm demonstrates particular expertise in torts and negligence. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 4 complex cases, representing 44.4% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

William Chai & Rama has demonstrated expertise across 10 primary practice areas, with significant experience in torts and negligence.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Torts	5 cases	14.7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized76.82% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 14.7% of their total caseload.
Negligence	5 cases	14.7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85.45% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 14.7% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	5 cases	14.7% of total caseload	Experienced67.50% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 14.7% of their total caseload.
Automobile Accidents	2 cases	5.9% of total caseload	Experienced72.50% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5.9% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	2 cases	5.9% of total caseload	Experienced62.50% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5.9% of their total caseload.
Insurance	2 cases	5.9% of total caseload	Experienced67.50% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5.9% of their total caseload.
Property Damage	2 cases	5.9% of total caseload	General Practice43.33% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5.9% of their total caseload.
Workers Compensation	2 cases	5.9% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77.50% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5.9% of their total caseload.
Insurance Litigation	1 cases	2.9% of total caseload	General Practice40.00% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2.9% of their total caseload.
Landlord and Tenant Law	1 cases	2.9% of total caseload	General Practice30.00% relevance score	William Chai & Rama has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2.9% of their total caseload.

Legal Team and Representation

William Chai & Rama has 10 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
M Ramasamy	3 cases	33.3% of firm's cases	2006 sghc 96(May 2006) 2003 sghc 136(Jun 2003)
K Anparasan	3 cases	33.3% of firm's cases	2001 sghc 289(Sep 2001) 2001 sghc 249(Aug 2001)
Robert Leslie Gregory	1 cases	11.1% of firm's cases	2003 sghc 136(Jun 2003)
Anparasan K	1 cases	11.1% of firm's cases	2000 sghc 82(May 2000)
Suja Sashidaran	1 cases	11.1% of firm's cases	2002 sghc 256(Oct 2002)
Shanthi Shanmugam	1 cases	11.1% of firm's cases	2002 sghc 256(Oct 2002)
Alvin Yeo Khim Hai	1 cases	11.1% of firm's cases	2001 sgca 2(Jan 2001)
Kamachi Amparasan	1 cases	11.1% of firm's cases	2001 sgca 2(Jan 2001)
Anparasan s/o Kamachi	1 cases	11.1% of firm's cases	2000 sghc 265(Dec 2000)
Cosmaz Gomez	1 cases	11.1% of firm's cases	2000 sghc 82(May 2000)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of William Chai & Rama's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.5
Complex Cases: 4 (44.4%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Won	52.7 parties avg	2.7	50.0%
Lost	33.9 parties avg	3.9	30.0%
Neutral	14.0 parties avg	4.0	10.0%
Other	17.0 parties avg	7.0	10.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	23.3 parties avg	3.3
2001	44.0 parties avg	4.0
2002	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2003	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2006	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of William Chai & Rama's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Won	5(50.0%)	50.0%
Lost	3(30.0%)	30.0%
Neutral	1(10.0%)	10.0%
Other	1(10.0%)	10.0%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	011 11	Lost: 1 cases (9.1%) Won: 1 cases (9.1%)
2001	01112 1112	Lost: 1 cases (0.1%) Neutral: 1 cases (0.1%) Other: 1 cases (0.1%) Won: 2 cases (0.2%)
2002	01 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2003	01 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	01 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Represented Parties

List of parties represented by William Chai & Rama in various cases

Party Name	Role	Cases	Outcomes
L &M Prestressing Pte LtdDefendant Neutral (1)Lost (1)	Defendant	2 cases	Neutral (1)Lost (1)
Liberty Citystate Insurance Pte LtdOther, Appellant, Respondent Neutral (1)Won (1)	Other, Appellant, Respondent	2 cases	Neutral (1)Won (1)
Lim Chong HongDefendant Lost (1)	Defendant	1 case	Lost (1)
Woodlands Transport Service Pte LtdDefendant Lost (1)	Defendant	1 case	Lost (1)
Koh Hong SonDefendant, Respondent Won (1)	Defendant, Respondent	1 case	Won (1)
Stamford Tyres International Pte LtdDefendant, Respondent Won (1)	Defendant, Respondent	1 case	Won (1)
Liberty Citystate Insurance Pte Ltd formerly known as Citystate Insurance Pte LtdThird Party Other (1)	Third Party	1 case	Other (1)
Indonesian Tractors Co Pte LtdRespondent Won (1)	Respondent	1 case	Won (1)
Second DefendantsDefendant Won (1)	Defendant	1 case	Won (1)
Chin Wee KeongDefendant Lost (1)	Defendant	1 case	Lost (1)