Benedict Chan

Benedict Chan is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2002 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 6 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and misuse of drugs act. Their track record shows a 75.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Benedict Chan has demonstrated expertise across 28 primary practice areas, with significant experience in automobile accidents and criminal law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Automobile Accidents	4 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced71% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	4 cases	8% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Evidence	4 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice46% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	4 cases	8% of total caseload	Highly Specialized96% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Negligence	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	3 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Causation	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Contributory negligence	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Damages	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Pre-trial loss of earnings	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Constitutional Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Statutory offences	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Benedict Chan 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	Experienced50% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Duress	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Offences	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Road Traffic Accident Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Benedict Chan 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	Experienced70% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Future Medical Expenses	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Benedict Chan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Benedict Chan has been affiliated with 6 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	3 cases	38% of cases	Lim Wei Fong Nicman v Public Prosecutor: Drug Trafficking, Duress Defense(Aug 2024) Munusamy Ramarmurth v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Drug Trafficking Conviction(Oct 2022) Yuen Ye Ming v Public Prosecutor: Extension of Time for Criminal Reference & Enhanced Punishment under Misuse of Drugs Act(Aug 2020)
Benedict Chan & Company	1 cases	13% of cases	Chiam Kim Loke v Lee Wing Hoong: Assessment of Damages for Road Traffic Accident Injuries(Feb 2004)
Prosecution	1 cases	13% of cases	PP v Poopathi Chinaiyah: Drug Trafficking under Misuse of Drugs Act(Feb 2020)
Benedict Chan & Co	1 cases	13% of cases	Mohamed Iskandar v Tan Seng Poh: Negligence, Motor Vehicle Accident, Apportionment of Liability(May 2008)
Benedict Chan and Partners	1 cases	13% of cases	Koh Swee Hoon v Yeo Hee Chong: Negligence and Contributory Negligence in Road Accident on Tampines Expressway(Oct 2005)
Goh Poh & Partners	1 cases	13% of cases	Karuppiah Nirmala v Singapore Bus Services Ltd: Personal Injury Damages - Future Medical Expenses & Loss of Earnings(May 2002)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Benedict Chan's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.1
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Partial	22.0 parties avg	2.0	25%
Won	62.2 parties avg	2.2	75%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2002	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2004	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2005	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2008	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2020	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2022	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2024	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Partial	2(25%)	25%
Won	6(75%)	75%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	269,175.31	67,293.834 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2002	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2004	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Lim Wei Fong Nicman v Public Prosecutor: Drug Trafficking, Duress Defense 25 Aug 2024 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	25 Aug 2024	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe respondent successfully defended the appeal against the appellant's conviction for drug trafficking.
2	Munusamy Ramarmurth v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Drug Trafficking Conviction 26 Oct 2022 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	26 Oct 2022	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.
3	Yuen Ye Ming v Public Prosecutor: Extension of Time for Criminal Reference & Enhanced Punishment under Misuse of Drugs Act 18 Aug 2020 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	18 Aug 2020	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Application dismissedThe Applicant's application for extension of time was dismissed.
4	PP v Poopathi Chinaiyah: Drug Trafficking under Misuse of Drugs Act 18 Feb 2020 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	18 Feb 2020	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for ProsecutionAccused convicted on all charges.
5	Mohamed Iskandar v Tan Seng Poh: Negligence, Motor Vehicle Accident, Apportionment of Liability 13 May 2008 Mohamed Iskandar bin Jumari (Plaintiff)Partial	13 May 2008	Mohamed Iskandar bin Jumari (Plaintiff): Partial LossThe Plaintiff was found to be primarily liable for the accident, but the Defendant was found to be 10% liable. No monetary amount was specified in the judgment. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Koh Swee Hoon v Yeo Hee Chong: Negligence and Contributory Negligence in Road Accident on Tampines Expressway 04 Oct 2005 Koh Swee Hoon Joanna Ophelia (Plaintiff)Partial	04 Oct 2005	Koh Swee Hoon Joanna Ophelia (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the plaintiff; damages to be assessed by the registrar, reduced by 40% due to contributory negligence. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Chiam Kim Loke v Lee Wing Hoong: Assessment of Damages for Road Traffic Accident Injuries 22 Feb 2004 Chiam Kim Loke (Plaintiff)Won	22 Feb 2004	Chiam Kim Loke (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; damages awarded in the amount of $269,175.31 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
8	Karuppiah Nirmala v Singapore Bus Services Ltd: Personal Injury Damages - Future Medical Expenses & Loss of Earnings 01 May 2002 Singapore Bus Services Ltd (Defendant, Appellant)Won	01 May 2002	Singapore Bus Services Ltd (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal allowedThe appeal was allowed and the awards made below were set aside and replaced by the awards made in this judgment. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.