B Ganeshamoorthy

B Ganeshamoorthy is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2010. The lawyer has handled 7 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 4 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in personal injury and company law. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 14% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated expertise across 41 primary practice areas, with significant experience in evidence and contract law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Evidence	4 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced66% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice37% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Director's Duties	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Automobile Accidents	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Minority Shareholder Rights	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Admissibility of evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Companies Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Assessment of Damages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Submission to Jurisdiction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Distributorship Agreement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Derivative action	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Loss of Earning Capacity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Traffic Accident Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Henna Artistry Business	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Patent Ambiguity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Latent Ambiguity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Oppression	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Rule in Turquand's case	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Shareholder Disputes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy 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	Experienced50% relevance score	B Ganeshamoorthy has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

B Ganeshamoorthy has been affiliated with 4 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Colin Ng & Partners LLP	3 cases	43% of cases	Zaiton Bee Bee v Chan Poh Teong: Assessment of Damages for Personal Injury in Traffic Accident(Apr 2010) Poondy Radhakrishnan v Sivapiragasam: Derivative Action for Breach of Fiduciary Duties(Oct 2009) Azizah bte Chalan Hassan v Chan Poh Teong: Personal Injury Claim for Damages(Jan 2009)
Colin Ng & Partners	2 cases	29% of cases	PP v Chijioke Stephen Obioha: Drug Trafficking, Cannabis, Misuse of Drugs Act(Dec 2008) Vix Marketing v Technogym: Validity of Distributorship Agreement & Arbitration Clause(Jun 2008)
Cornerstone Law LLP	1 cases	14% of cases	Elitegroup v Kobian: Stay of Execution Pending Amended Counterclaim for False Representation(Jan 2010)
Ganesha & Partners	1 cases	14% of cases	Kitnasamy v Nagatheran: Interlocutory Injunction & Minority Oppression under Section 216 of Companies Act(Mar 2000)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of B Ganeshamoorthy's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.7
Complex Cases: 1 (14%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	62.6 parties avg	2.6	86%
Neutral	14.0 parties avg	4.0	14%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	14%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2008	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	23.3 parties avg	3.3
2010	22.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	6(75%)	75%
Neutral	1(13%)	13%
Partial	1(13%)	13%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	300,646.63	75,161.664 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2009	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Neutral: 1 cases (33.3%)
2010	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 7 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Zaiton Bee Bee v Chan Poh Teong: Assessment of Damages for Personal Injury in Traffic Accident 19 Apr 2010 Zaiton Bee Bee bte Abdul Majeed (Plaintiff, Appellant)Partial	19 Apr 2010	Zaiton Bee Bee bte Abdul Majeed (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in relation to the claim for post-trial loss of earnings and costs. Total amount recovered is $291,646.63 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Elitegroup v Kobian: Stay of Execution Pending Amended Counterclaim for False Representation 31 Jan 2010 Kobian Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	31 Jan 2010	Kobian Pte Ltd (Defendant): Applications deniedDefendant's applications for leave to amend its counterclaim and for a stay of execution were denied. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Poondy Radhakrishnan v Sivapiragasam: Derivative Action for Breach of Fiduciary Duties 08 Oct 2009 Sivapiragasam s/o Veerasingam (Defendant)Lost	08 Oct 2009	Sivapiragasam s/o Veerasingam (Defendant): Application AllowedApplication to pursue a derivative action in the name of Megatech System against Sivapiragasam was granted. Costs of the application were fixed at $6,500 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Azizah bte Chalan Hassan v Chan Poh Teong: Personal Injury Claim for Damages 19 Jan 2009 Azizah bte Chalan Hassan (Plaintiff, Appellant)Lost	19 Jan 2009	Azizah bte Chalan Hassan (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal dismissedAppeal against the assessment of damages was dismissed.
5	PP v Chijioke Stephen Obioha: Drug Trafficking, Cannabis, Misuse of Drugs Act 29 Dec 2008 CHIJIOKE STEPHEN OBIOHA (Defendant)Lost	29 Dec 2008	CHIJIOKE STEPHEN OBIOHA (Defendant): ConvictedThe defendant was convicted of the charges.
6	Vix Marketing v Technogym: Validity of Distributorship Agreement & Arbitration Clause 29 Jun 2008 Vix Marketing Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant)Lost	29 Jun 2008	Vix Marketing Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs of $2,500 to the defendant (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	Kitnasamy v Nagatheran: Interlocutory Injunction & Minority Oppression under Section 216 of Companies Act 21 Mar 2000 Nagatheran s/o Manogar (Respondent)Lost	21 Mar 2000	Nagatheran s/o Manogar (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal against respondent allowed.