Aw Wei Keng Kelvin

Aw Wei Keng Kelvin is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2018 to 2025. The lawyer has handled 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in construction law and performance bond. Their track record shows a 100.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated expertise across 15 primary practice areas, with significant experience in construction law and arbitration.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Construction Law	2 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Insurance	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Performance Bond	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Erinford Injunction	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Natural justice	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Witnesses	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Adjudication	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 2004	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Aw Wei Keng Kelvin has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 1 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Holborn Law LLC	1 cases	50% of cases	Ee Hup Construction v China Jingye: Performance Bond Call & Unconscionability(Feb 2025)
Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC	1 cases	50% of cases	Bintai Kindenko v Samsung C&T: Setting Aside Adjudication Determination for Breach of Natural Justice(Jul 2018)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Aw Wei Keng Kelvin's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.5
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Won	22.5 parties avg	2.5	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2018	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2025	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Aw Wei Keng Kelvin's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Won	2(100%)	100%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	55,000.00	27,500.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2025	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Ee Hup Construction v China Jingye: Performance Bond Call & Unconscionability 10 Feb 2025 China Jingye Engineering Corporation Limited (Singapore Branch) (Respondent)Won	10 Feb 2025	China Jingye Engineering Corporation Limited (Singapore Branch) (Respondent): Appeal UpheldAppeal against the injunction was dismissed; awarded costs of $35,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Bintai Kindenko v Samsung C&T: Setting Aside Adjudication Determination for Breach of Natural Justice 08 Jul 2018 Samsung C&T Corporation (Respondent)Won	08 Jul 2018	Samsung C&T Corporation (Respondent): Appeal UpheldAppeal upheld; Samsung awarded costs in the sum of $20,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).