Daniel Tan Shi Min

Daniel Tan Shi Min is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2016 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 10 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in insolvency law and minority oppression. Their track record shows a 60.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 7 complex cases, representing 70% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated expertise across 42 primary practice areas, with significant experience in company law and insolvency law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Company Law	7 cases	10% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	5 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized91% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	4 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Minority Oppression	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Dissolution	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Interim injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Shipping Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Interim Judicial Management	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Restitution	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Garnishee Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Trust	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Valuation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Shares	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Shareholders Agreement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Crossclaims	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Shipping Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judicial Management	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mareva Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Shareholder Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Assignment Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Daniel Tan Shi Min has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Daniel Tan Shi Min has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 6 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Shook Lin & Bok LLP	6 cases	60% of cases	Da Hui Shipping v An Rong Shipping: Contribution, Subrogation & Ship Mortgages(Jun 2024) Da Hui Shipping v An Rong Shipping: Permission to Appeal under Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act(Feb 2024) Founder Group v Singapore JHC: Winding Up, Disputed Debt & Arbitration(Nov 2023)
WongPartnership LLP	4 cases	40% of cases	JTrust Asia v Group Lease: Striking Out Application for Conspiracy to Defraud(Jan 2019) Koh Keng Chew v Liew Kit Fah: Minority Shareholder Rights, Oppression, and Valuation of Shares(Nov 2018) Koh Keng Chew v Liew Kit Fah: Minority Shareholder Oppression & Corporate Governance(Jul 2016)

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 11.1
Complex Cases: 7 (70%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	214.8 parties avg	14.8	20%
Neutral	18.0 parties avg	8.0	10%
Partial	14.0 parties avg	4.0	10%
Won	610.5 parties avg	10.5	60%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2016	216.0 parties avg	16.0
2018	119.0 parties avg	19.0
2019	18.0 parties avg	8.0
2020	26.0 parties avg	6.0
2022	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2023	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2024	23.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(20%)	20%
Neutral	1(10%)	10%
Partial	1(10%)	10%
Won	6(60%)	60%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.003 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2016	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 10 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Da Hui Shipping v An Rong Shipping: Contribution, Subrogation & Ship Mortgages 27 Jun 2024 Da Hui Shipping (Pte.) Ltd. (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) (Claimant)Partial	27 Jun 2024	Da Hui Shipping (Pte.) Ltd. (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) (Claimant): Application allowed in part and dismissed in partPrayer 1 granted, Prayers 2 and 3 dismissed.
2	Da Hui Shipping v An Rong Shipping: Permission to Appeal under Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 18 Feb 2024 Da Hui Shipping (Pte.) Ltd. (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) (Applicant)Lost	18 Feb 2024	Da Hui Shipping (Pte.) Ltd. (in creditors’ voluntary liquidation) (Applicant): PTA Application dismissedDa Hui's application for permission to appeal was dismissed.
3	Founder Group v Singapore JHC: Winding Up, Disputed Debt & Arbitration 27 Nov 2023 Founder Group (Hong Kong) Limited (in liquidation) (Appellant, Claimant)Won	27 Nov 2023	Founder Group (Hong Kong) Limited (in liquidation) (Appellant, Claimant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed and JHC ordered to be wound up. Costs awarded to Founder Group (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Shinhan Investment Corp v Yap Shi Wen: Mareva Injunction for Fraudulent WeWork Shares 22 Mar 2022 Shinhan Investment Corporation (Plaintiff)Won	22 Mar 2022	Shinhan Investment Corporation (Plaintiff): Application grantedPlaintiff's application for a worldwide Mareva Injunction against the first to third defendants granted.
5	OCBC vs KS Energy: Interim Judicial Management under IRDA for Insolvency 17 Sep 2020 Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited (Applicant)Won	17 Sep 2020	Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited (Applicant): Orders sought grantedThe applicant's application for interim judicial management was granted.
6	JTrust Asia v Group Lease: Tort of Deceit, Conspiracy & Mareva Injunctions 31 May 2020 Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	31 May 2020	Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd (Respondent): Application to reinstate Mareva injunction dismissedApplication to reinstate Mareva injunction against Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	JTrust Asia v Group Lease: Striking Out Application for Conspiracy to Defraud 31 Jan 2019 Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd (Defendant)Neutral	31 Jan 2019	Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd (Defendant): No specific outcomeNo specific outcome for this party is mentioned in the judgment extract.
8	Koh Keng Chew v Liew Kit Fah: Minority Shareholder Rights, Oppression, and Valuation of Shares 27 Nov 2018 Koh Hoon Lye (Plaintiff)Won	27 Nov 2018	Koh Hoon Lye (Plaintiff): Shares to be valued without discountCourt directed that discounts for lack of control and lack of free transferability were not to be applied to the valuation of the plaintiffs’ shares.
9	Koh Keng Chew v Liew Kit Fah: Minority Shareholder Oppression & Corporate Governance 28 Jul 2016 Koh Hoon Lye (Plaintiff)Lost	28 Jul 2016	Koh Hoon Lye (Plaintiff): Shares to be purchased by defendantsThe court ordered the 1st to 6th defendants to purchase the shares of the plaintiffs.
10	Encus International Pte Ltd v Tenacious Investment Pte Ltd: Avoidance of Transactions, Unfair Preference, Anti-Deprivation Principle 30 Mar 2016 ENCUS INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD (in compulsory liquidation) (Plaintiff)Won	30 Mar 2016	ENCUS INTERNATIONAL PTE LTD (in compulsory liquidation) (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the plaintiff; the court declared the CSTA null and void and ordered the return of the shares. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.