Arthur Yap

Arthur Yap is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2007 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 11 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 5 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in patents and patent infringement. Their track record shows a 18.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 18% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Arthur Yap has demonstrated expertise across 41 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and breach of contract.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	9 cases	13% of total caseload	General Practice34% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 9 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	5 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice49% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Patents	4 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	4 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	4 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced64% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice23% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Election of Remedies	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Account of Profits	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Confidence	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Patent Infringement	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Discovery of documents	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Res Judicata	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Discovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Joint Venture	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty to Account	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mentally disordered offenders	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Interim Payment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Patent Amendments	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Dynamic Currency Conversion System	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Internet Piracy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Innocent Infringement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Copyrights	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Minority Oppression	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Arthur Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Arthur Yap has been affiliated with 5 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
CHP Law LLC	3 cases	27% of cases	Neverland Investment Holdings Pte Ltd v P.T Pte Ltd: Setting Aside Default Judgment(Jan 2023) Yee Heng Khay v Angliss Singapore: Breach of Confidence, Loyalty, and Fidelity Dispute(May 2022) Angliss Singapore Pte Ltd v Yee Heng Khay: Breach of Confidence, Fiduciary Duty, and Contractual Obligations(Jul 2021)
ATMD Bird & Bird LLP	3 cases	27% of cases	Monex Group v E-Clearing: Breach of Contract Dispute over Dynamic Currency Conversion System(Feb 2010) Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v United Overseas Bank Ltd: Election of Remedies for Patent Infringement(Oct 2009) Main-Line Corporate Holdings v United Overseas Bank: Patent Infringement & Interim Payments(Sep 2009)
Alban Tay Mahtani & de Silva	3 cases	27% of cases	Odex v Pacific Internet: Discovery for Copyright Infringement via Internet Piracy(Mar 2008) Seiko Epson v Sepoms Technology: Defence of Innocent Infringement in Patent Law(Nov 2007) First Currency Choice v Main-Line: Dynamic Currency Conversion Patent Dispute(Oct 2007)
Tan Kok Quan Partnership	1 cases	9% of cases	Sharikat Logistics v Ong Boon Chuan: Breach of Fiduciary Duty & Oppression Claim(Sep 2011)
Alban Tay Mahtani & De Sliva LLP	1 cases	9% of cases	Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v United Overseas Bank Ltd: Patent Infringement & Discovery(Apr 2008)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Arthur Yap's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.8
Complex Cases: 2 (18%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	62.5 parties avg	2.5	55%
Neutral	13.0 parties avg	3.0	9%
Partial	23.5 parties avg	3.5	18%
Won	23.0 parties avg	3.0	18%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2007	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2008	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2009	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2021	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2022	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	6(55%)	55%
Neutral	1(9%)	9%
Partial	2(18%)	18%
Won	2(18%)	18%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	40,000.00	6,666.676 cases	6

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2007	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2008	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2009	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%)
2010	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2021	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 11 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Neverland Investment Holdings Pte Ltd v P.T Pte Ltd: Setting Aside Default Judgment 19 Jan 2023 P.T Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant)Partial	19 Jan 2023	P.T Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant): Security amount reducedThe court reduced the amount of security to be furnished.
2	Yee Heng Khay v Angliss Singapore: Breach of Confidence, Loyalty, and Fidelity Dispute 08 May 2022 Yee Heng Khay (alias Roger) (Appellant, Defendant)Lost	08 May 2022	Yee Heng Khay (alias Roger) (Appellant, Defendant): Appeal dismissedYee was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal fixed at $40,000 (all-in). Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Angliss Singapore Pte Ltd v Yee Heng Khay: Breach of Confidence, Fiduciary Duty, and Contractual Obligations 29 Jul 2021 Yee Heng Khay (alias Roger) (Defendant)Lost	29 Jul 2021	Yee Heng Khay (alias Roger) (Defendant): Claim DismissedDefendant found liable for breach of confidence and contractual obligations; ordered to pay damages (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Sharikat Logistics v Ong Boon Chuan: Breach of Fiduciary Duty & Oppression Claim 01 Sep 2011 Sharikat Logistics Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant)Won	01 Sep 2011	Sharikat Logistics Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal against the order compelling the plaintiff to provide further and better particulars of its claim was allowed.
5	Monex Group v E-Clearing: Breach of Contract Dispute over Dynamic Currency Conversion System 25 Feb 2010 E-Clearing (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	25 Feb 2010	E-Clearing (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Defendant): Counterclaim DismissedDefendant's counterclaim for losses suffered as a result of the plaintiff's alleged breach of contract was dismissed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v United Overseas Bank Ltd: Election of Remedies for Patent Infringement 15 Oct 2009 First Currency Choice Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent, Third Party)Lost	15 Oct 2009	First Currency Choice Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent, Third Party): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the decision to allow Main-Line to elect damages was dismissed.
7	Main-Line Corporate Holdings v United Overseas Bank: Patent Infringement & Interim Payments 22 Sep 2009 First Currency Choice Pte Ltd (Defendant)Neutral	22 Sep 2009	First Currency Choice Pte Ltd (Defendant): NeutralThe judgment pertains to an interim payment application against the first defendant, United Overseas Bank Ltd. The outcome for First Currency Choice Pte Ltd is not directly addressed in this judgment.
8	Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v United Overseas Bank Ltd: Patent Infringement & Discovery 09 Apr 2008 First Currency Choice Pte Ltd (Defendant)Partial	09 Apr 2008	First Currency Choice Pte Ltd (Defendant): Application granted in partApplication for discovery granted in part, with specific documents to be disclosed by the second defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	Odex v Pacific Internet: Discovery for Copyright Infringement via Internet Piracy 06 Mar 2008 Pacific Internet Ltd (Respondent)Won	06 Mar 2008	Pacific Internet Ltd (Respondent): Application DismissedOdex's application for pre-action discovery was dismissed. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
10	Seiko Epson v Sepoms Technology: Defence of Innocent Infringement in Patent Law 15 Nov 2007 Seiko Epson Corporation (Appellant)Lost	15 Nov 2007	Seiko Epson Corporation (Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe appeal was dismissed with costs.
11	First Currency Choice v Main-Line: Dynamic Currency Conversion Patent Dispute 30 Oct 2007 First Currency Choice Pte Ltd (Appellant)Lost	30 Oct 2007	First Currency Choice Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.