Cham Shan Jie Mark

Cham Shan Jie Mark is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2008 to 2025. The lawyer has handled 5 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in international law and recognition of foreign judgments. Their track record shows a 40.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 5 complex cases, representing 100% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated expertise across 34 primary practice areas, with significant experience in civil procedure and arbitration.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Civil Procedure	3 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	3 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice12% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
International Law	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice18% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Contracts	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice32% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice23% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Cross-Border Insolvency	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Forum Non Conveniens	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Professional Liability	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Damage	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Insurance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Recognition of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Confidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark 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	General Practice10% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Foreign Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Service of document out of jurisdiction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Accountants Liability	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Full and Frank Disclosure	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Cham Shan Jie Mark has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Cham Shan Jie Mark has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Aquinas Law Alliance LLP	2 cases	40% of cases	Vibrant Group v Tong Chi Ho: Deceit Claim over Blackgold Australia Acquisition(Jan 2025) Vibrant Group Ltd v Tong Chi Ho: Jurisdiction & Forum Non Conveniens in Fraudulent Misrepresentation Claim(Oct 2022)
Kenneth Tan Partnership	2 cases	40% of cases	Republic of the Philippines v Maler Foundation: Sovereign Immunity & Interpleader Proceedings(Mar 2008) Obegi Melissa v Vestwin Trading: Breach of Confidence & Conversion of Discarded Documents(Jan 2008)
Gurbani & Co LLC	1 cases	20% of cases	Heince Tombak Simanjuntak v Paulus Tannos: Recognition of Indonesian Bankruptcy Orders in Singapore(Sep 2019)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Cham Shan Jie Mark's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 10.1
Complex Cases: 5 (100%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	35.0 parties avg	5.0	60%
Won	211.5 parties avg	11.5	40%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2008	211.5 parties avg	11.5
2019	17.0 parties avg	7.0
2022	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2025	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Cham Shan Jie Mark's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(60%)	60%
Won	2(40%)	40%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2008	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2025	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 5 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Vibrant Group v Tong Chi Ho: Deceit Claim over Blackgold Australia Acquisition 26 Jan 2025 Peng Yuguo (Defendant)Lost	26 Jan 2025	Peng Yuguo (Defendant): Liable in the tort of deceitDefendant found liable in the tort of deceit and is jointly and severally liable for the sums awarded to the claimant.
2	Vibrant Group Ltd v Tong Chi Ho: Jurisdiction & Forum Non Conveniens in Fraudulent Misrepresentation Claim 11 Oct 2022 Peng Yuguo (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	11 Oct 2022	Peng Yuguo (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal dismissedAppeal against declining to set aside the service out of jurisdiction orders or to stay the proceedings in respect of the second defendant was dismissed.
3	Heince Tombak Simanjuntak v Paulus Tannos: Recognition of Indonesian Bankruptcy Orders in Singapore 17 Sep 2019 Paulus Tannos (Respondent)Lost	17 Sep 2019	Paulus Tannos (Respondent): Application dismissedRespondents' application for setting aside the recognition order was dismissed.
4	Republic of the Philippines v Maler Foundation: Sovereign Immunity & Interpleader Proceedings 23 Mar 2008 Plaintiffs in the estate of Ferdinand and E Marcos Human Rights Litigation in Case No. MDL840-R in the United States District of Hawaii (Respondent)Won	23 Mar 2008	Plaintiffs in the estate of Ferdinand and E Marcos Human Rights Litigation in Case No. MDL840-R in the United States District of Hawaii (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; the Republic of the Philippines was ordered to bear 50% of the costs of the respondents in the appeal (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
5	Obegi Melissa v Vestwin Trading: Breach of Confidence & Conversion of Discarded Documents 27 Jan 2008 Nemesis Investigations Pte Ltd (Appellant)Won	27 Jan 2008	Nemesis Investigations Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed with costs to be costs in the cause.