Chou Xiujue Ailene

Chou Xiujue Ailene is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2015 to 2015. The lawyer has handled 1 case in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in judicial review and match-fixing.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Chou Xiujue Ailene has demonstrated expertise across 7 primary practice areas, with significant experience in administrative law and criminal law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Administrative Law	1 cases	14% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Chou Xiujue Ailene has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	1 cases	14% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Chou Xiujue Ailene has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.
Judicial Review	1 cases	14% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Chou Xiujue Ailene has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	14% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Chou Xiujue Ailene has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure and Sentencing	1 cases	14% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Chou Xiujue Ailene has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.
Match-fixing	1 cases	14% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Chou Xiujue Ailene has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.
Rule of Law	1 cases	14% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Chou Xiujue Ailene has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Chou Xiujue Ailene has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 1 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	1 cases	100% of cases	Tan Seet Eng v Attorney-General: Review of Detention Order & Limits of Executive Power under Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act(Nov 2015)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Chou Xiujue Ailene's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.0
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Chou Xiujue Ailene's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(100%)	100%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2015	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 1 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Tan Seet Eng v Attorney-General: Review of Detention Order & Limits of Executive Power under Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act 24 Nov 2015 Attorney-General (Respondent)Lost	24 Nov 2015	Attorney-General (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; the conclusion we have reached makes it unnecessary for us to deal with two other grounds of challenge raised by the Appellant, namely, irrationality and procedural irregularity. It follows that the Appellant should be freed and the costs order made against him below should be set aside. We will hear the parties on any other issues that remain outstanding, including the question of costs. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.