Daniel Ho

Daniel Ho is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2016 to 2017. The lawyer has handled 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in trademarks and minority oppression. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 50% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Daniel Ho has demonstrated expertise across 15 primary practice areas, with significant experience in civil procedure and corporate law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Civil Procedure	2 cases	12% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	12% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Criminal Revision	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Law	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Minority Oppression	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Director's Duties	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Companies Act	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Judicial Review	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Shareholders’ dispute	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Directors	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Daniel Ho has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Daniel Ho has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 1 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Wong & Leow LLC	1 cases	50% of cases	Mukherjee v DyStar: Director's Right to Inspect Company Records under Section 199 of the Companies Act(Dec 2017)
Summit Law Corporation	1 cases	50% of cases	Axis Law Corp v Intellectual Property Office: Judicial Review & Amendment of Trademark Statement(Jul 2016)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Daniel Ho's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.5
Complex Cases: 1 (50%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	13.0 parties avg	3.0	50%
Won	15.0 parties avg	5.0	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2016	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2017	15.0 parties avg	5.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(50%)	50%
Won	1(50%)	50%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	81,000.00	40,500.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2016	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Mukherjee v DyStar: Director's Right to Inspect Company Records under Section 199 of the Companies Act 18 Dec 2017 Yao Jianfang (Defendant)Won	18 Dec 2017	Yao Jianfang (Defendant): Judgment in favor of DefendantPlaintiff's application dismissed; plaintiff ordered to pay costs of SGD 25,000. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Axis Law Corp v Intellectual Property Office: Judicial Review & Amendment of Trademark Statement 03 Jul 2016 Axis Law Corp (Plaintiff, Applicant)Lost	03 Jul 2016	Axis Law Corp (Plaintiff, Applicant): Application dismissedApplication for judicial review dismissed; costs of $5,000 and disbursements of $1,000 awarded to the Defendant (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).