Adly Rizal bin Said

Adly Rizal bin Said is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2019 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in contractual terms and performance bond. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 13% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated expertise across 27 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and breach of contract.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	7 cases	16% of total caseload	Experienced72% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 16% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	4 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced71% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Evidence	4 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice46% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced59% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Contractual terms	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized89% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Performance Bond	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Termination	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Admissibility of evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Intention to create legal relations	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Remedies	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Insolvency	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Voluntary Arrangements	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Consumer Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Adly Rizal bin Said has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Adly Rizal bin Said has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Tito Isaac & Co LLP	4 cases	50% of cases	Ice Messaging Pte Ltd v Ng Chee Heung: Unjust Enrichment & Unauthorized Payments(Jan 2022) CGS-CIMB Securities v Koh Yew Choo: Leave to Serve Rejoinder & Consumer Protection(Dec 2020) Aathar Ah Kong Andrew v CIMB Securities: Voluntary Arrangement & Material Irregularity(May 2019)
Bird & Bird ATMD LLP	4 cases	50% of cases	Keppel DC Singapore 1 Ltd v DXC Technology Services: Contractual Term Dispute over Data Centre Services(Jan 2024) ICOP Construction v Tiong Seng: Construction Dispute over Microtunneling Works(Jan 2024) Voltas Ltd v Ng Theng Swee: Conspiracy, Deceit & Breach of Contract in Construction Subcontract(Sep 2023)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Adly Rizal bin Said's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.7
Complex Cases: 1 (13%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	22.7 parties avg	2.7	25%
Partial	22.0 parties avg	2.0	25%
Won	43.0 parties avg	3.0	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2019	23.5 parties avg	3.5
2020	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2022	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2023	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2024	22.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Adly Rizal bin Said's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(25%)	25%
Partial	2(25%)	25%
Won	4(50%)	50%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
CNY	1,885,630.00	1,885,630.001 cases	1
SGD	4,498,346.49	899,669.305 cases	5

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2019	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2024	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Keppel DC Singapore 1 Ltd v DXC Technology Services: Contractual Term Dispute over Data Centre Services 11 Jan 2024 DXC Technology Services Singapore Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	11 Jan 2024	DXC Technology Services Singapore Pte Ltd (Defendant): Claim DismissedClaim dismissed against the Defendant; the judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	ICOP Construction v Tiong Seng: Construction Dispute over Microtunneling Works 01 Jan 2024 ICOP Construction (SG) Pte Ltd (Appellant, Plaintiff)Partial	01 Jan 2024	ICOP Construction (SG) Pte Ltd (Appellant, Plaintiff): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part. ICOP was awarded $489,064.89 for TSCE's delay in obtaining Authorities' Approvals and $255,360 for MTBM rental costs. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	Voltas Ltd v Ng Theng Swee: Conspiracy, Deceit & Breach of Contract in Construction Subcontract 04 Sep 2023 Voltas Limited (Plaintiff, Defendant in Counterclaim)Won	04 Sep 2023	Voltas Limited (Plaintiff, Defendant in Counterclaim): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff against the second defendant in the amount of S$3,437,937.36 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Zhongshan Shengwang v Triple D: Breach of Contract & Intention to Create Legal Relations 29 Aug 2023 Zhongshan Shengwang Electrical Appliance Co Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	29 Aug 2023	Zhongshan Shengwang Electrical Appliance Co Ltd (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment in the sum of CNY1,885,630.00 to Shengwang. Interest at the rate of 5.33% per annum from the date of writ to date of judgment.
5	Ice Messaging Pte Ltd v Ng Chee Heung: Unjust Enrichment & Unauthorized Payments 27 Jan 2022 Ng Chee Heung (Defendant)Lost	27 Jan 2022	Ng Chee Heung (Defendant): Claim DismissedJudgment against Ng in the sum of $174,988.34 with interest from the date of the writ of summons (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	CGS-CIMB Securities v Koh Yew Choo: Leave to Serve Rejoinder & Consumer Protection 20 Dec 2020 CGS-CIMB Securities (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Partial	20 Dec 2020	CGS-CIMB Securities (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Leave to serve surrejoinder grantedPlaintiff was granted leave to serve a surrejoinder to provide its defence to the additional counterclaim in the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act pleading.
7	Aathar Ah Kong Andrew v CIMB Securities: Voluntary Arrangement & Material Irregularity 09 May 2019 CIMB Securities (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	09 May 2019	CIMB Securities (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; awarded costs of $3,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
8	Wen Wen Food Trading v Food Republic: Striking Out Claim for Misrepresentation & Breach of Contract 06 Mar 2019 Food Republic Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent)Won	06 Mar 2019	Food Republic Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent): Claim Struck OutClaim struck out; costs of $4,500.00, inclusive of disbursements, awarded against the plaintiff. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.