Andreas Vogel

Andreas Vogel is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2024 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 1 case in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in insolvency law and winding up. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 100% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Andreas Vogel has demonstrated expertise across 9 primary practice areas, with significant experience in insolvency law and winding up.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Insolvency Law	1 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	1 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Limitation	1 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Proof of Debt	1 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	11% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	11% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Ratification	1 cases	11% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Andreas Vogel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Andreas Vogel has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 1 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Independent Practitioner	1 cases	100% of cases	Lin Yueh Hung v Andreas Vogel: Validity of Debt Rejection under IRDA(Feb 2024)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Andreas Vogel's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 5.0
Complex Cases: 1 (100%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	15.0 parties avg	5.0	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2024	15.0 parties avg	5.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Andreas Vogel's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(100%)	100%

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2024	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 1 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Lin Yueh Hung v Andreas Vogel: Validity of Debt Rejection under IRDA 01 Feb 2024 Andreas Vogel & Partner, Rechtsanwaelte, AV & P Legal LLP (Defendant)Lost	01 Feb 2024	Andreas Vogel & Partner, Rechtsanwaelte, AV & P Legal LLP (Defendant): Claims RejectedThe court determined that the applicants’ decision to reject all of the defendants’ claims was correctly made.