Bhaskaran Shamkumar

Bhaskaran Shamkumar is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2015 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 5 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in matrimonial assets and maintenance. Their track record shows a 20.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 20% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated expertise across 25 primary practice areas, with significant experience in matrimonial assets and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Matrimonial Assets	2 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Maintenance	2 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Family Law	2 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Maintenance (Wife)	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Maintenance (Child)	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Implied Terms	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Children's Welfare	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Quantum	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Sale of Goods	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Workplace accident	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Wedding Services	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Child Custody	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Child Support	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Copyrights	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Divorce	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Bhaskaran Shamkumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Bhaskaran Shamkumar has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
APAC Law Corporation	4 cases	80% of cases	UZO v UZP: Division of Matrimonial Assets, Child & Wife Maintenance(Dec 2019) Honey Secret Pte Ltd v Atlas Finefood Pte Ltd: Misrepresentation & Implied Terms in Sale of Goods(Aug 2016) Rahman Lutfar v Scanpile Constructors: Personal Injury Damages Assessment(Mar 2016)
Accord Law Chambers	1 cases	20% of cases	WJM v WJN: Division of Matrimonial Assets and Maintenance Dispute(Apr 2023)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Bhaskaran Shamkumar's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.8
Complex Cases: 1 (20%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	23.0 parties avg	3.0	40%
Partial	22.5 parties avg	2.5	40%
Won	13.0 parties avg	3.0	20%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	23.5 parties avg	3.5
2019	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2023	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(40%)	40%
Partial	2(40%)	40%
Won	1(20%)	20%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	638,848.81	159,712.204 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2015	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2019	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 5 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	WJM v WJN: Division of Matrimonial Assets and Maintenance Dispute 02 Apr 2023 WJM (Appellant)Lost	02 Apr 2023	WJM (Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe Wife's appeal against the division of matrimonial assets and maintenance order was dismissed.
2	UZO v UZP: Division of Matrimonial Assets, Child & Wife Maintenance 18 Dec 2019 UZO (Plaintiff)Partial	18 Dec 2019	UZO (Plaintiff): PartialThe wife was awarded $212,410.91 from the division of matrimonial assets and monthly maintenance of $3,000.00 for six months, followed by $1,500.00 for another six months. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Honey Secret Pte Ltd v Atlas Finefood Pte Ltd: Misrepresentation & Implied Terms in Sale of Goods 17 Aug 2016 Honey Secret Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant in Counterclaim)Lost	17 Aug 2016	Honey Secret Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant in Counterclaim): Claim DismissedPlaintiff's claim against all three defendants was dismissed with costs. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the currency of the jurisdiction.
4	Rahman Lutfar v Scanpile Constructors: Personal Injury Damages Assessment 16 Mar 2016 Rahman Lutfar (Plaintiff)Won	16 Mar 2016	Rahman Lutfar (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; damages awarded in the amount of $426,437.90 (SGD).
5	Wang Choong Li v Wong Wan Chin: Copyright Ownership of Wedding Photographs Dispute 11 May 2015 Wang Choong Li (Appellant)Partial	11 May 2015	Wang Choong Li (Appellant): Appeal dismissed in partAppeal dismissed in part. The appellant was unsuccessful in appealing the copyright of the pre-wedding photographs. The appeal was successful in relation to the wedding day photographs. The injunction was discharged.