Brinden Anandakumar

Brinden Anandakumar is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2019 to 2022. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and disciplinary proceedings. Their track record shows a 22.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 13% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated expertise across 39 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	4 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Disciplinary Proceedings	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Extension of Time	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Professional conduct	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Formation of contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Inherent powers	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Discovery of documents	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conflict of Interest	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Duty	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Lifting corporate veil	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mitigation of damage	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Sale of Goods	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Performance of Contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Professional Ethics	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Leave	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contractual Remedies	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar 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	General Practice40% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Brinden Anandakumar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Brinden Anandakumar has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 8 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Fullerton Law Chambers LLC	8 cases	100% of cases	Commodities Intelligence Centre Pte Ltd v Mako International Trd Pte Ltd: Agency, Fiduciary Duties & Contractual Disputes(May 2022) Commodities Intelligence Centre v Hoi Suen Logistics: Appeal on Setting Aside Order to Enforce Arbitral Award(Nov 2021) Lin Jianwei v Tung Yu-Lien Margaret: Raffles Town Club Dispute over Company Act s216A and Appeal Leave(Jul 2021)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Brinden Anandakumar's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.0
Complex Cases: 1 (13%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	53.2 parties avg	3.2	63%
Neutral	13.0 parties avg	3.0	13%
Partial	14.0 parties avg	4.0	13%
Won	22.0 parties avg	2.0	25%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2019	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2020	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2021	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2022	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	5(56%)	56%
Neutral	1(11%)	11%
Partial	1(11%)	11%
Won	2(22%)	22%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	57,000.00	11,400.005 cases	5
USD	1,222,060.03	611,030.022 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2019	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%)
2020	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2021	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2022	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Commodities Intelligence Centre Pte Ltd v Mako International Trd Pte Ltd: Agency, Fiduciary Duties & Contractual Disputes 30 May 2022 Chua Yi Yang (Defendant)Lost	30 May 2022	Chua Yi Yang (Defendant): Claim DismissedAll causes of action are dismissed.
2	Commodities Intelligence Centre v Hoi Suen Logistics: Appeal on Setting Aside Order to Enforce Arbitral Award 29 Nov 2021 Hoi Suen Logistics (HK) Ltd (Respondent)Won	29 Nov 2021	Hoi Suen Logistics (HK) Ltd (Respondent): Application dismissedApplication for extension of time to file notice of appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent fixed at $12,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Lin Jianwei v Tung Yu-Lien Margaret: Raffles Town Club Dispute over Company Act s216A and Appeal Leave 01 Jul 2021 Lin Jianwei (Appellant, Plaintiff)Lost	01 Jul 2021	Lin Jianwei (Appellant, Plaintiff): Appeal DismissedLin's appeals were dismissed, and he was ordered to pay Tung $40,000 in costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Lin Jianwei v Tung Yu-Lien Margaret: Application for Leave to Appeal Decision on Reimbursement of Legal Fees 25 Oct 2020 Lin Jianwei (Plaintiff)Lost	25 Oct 2020	Lin Jianwei (Plaintiff): Application dismissedPlaintiff's application for a declaration that he does not require leave to appeal against the decision in Summons No 1281 of 2020 was dismissed. No monetary amount was specified. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Law Society of Singapore v Govindan Balan Nair: Conflict of Interest in Disciplinary Proceedings 18 Aug 2020 Law Society of Singapore (Applicant)Won	18 Aug 2020	Law Society of Singapore (Applicant): Appeal AllowedThe Law Society's application was allowed. The Disciplinary Tribunal's reprimand was set aside, and the respondent was found guilty on the primary charge. Costs of the review fixed at $5,000, inclusive of disbursements (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Apex Energy v Wanxiang Resources: Breach of Contract & Damages for Light Cycle Oil 05 Jul 2020 Wanxiang Resources (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	05 Jul 2020	Wanxiang Resources (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Defendant): Damages AwardedDamages awarded against the Defendant in the amount of $1,211,778.60 (assumed USD, as the judgment involves international oil trading and the damages are calculated in USD).
7	Materials Industry v. Vopak Terminals: Dispute over PME Cargo Disposal and Contractual Lien 27 Nov 2019 Materials Industry and Trade (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant in Counterclaim)Lost	27 Nov 2019	Materials Industry and Trade (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant in Counterclaim): Claim DismissedThe plaintiff's claim was dismissed.
8	Absolute Kinetics Consultancy v Seah Yong Wah: Non-Party Discovery & Inherent Powers 13 Jan 2019 SINGAPORE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (Non-Party)Neutral	13 Jan 2019	SINGAPORE TELECOMMUNICATIONS LIMITED (Non-Party): OtherRequired to provide information subject to safeguards.