Dawn Wee

Dawn Wee is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2006 to 2009. The lawyer has handled 5 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in fiduciary duties and banking law. Their track record shows a 60.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 40% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Dawn Wee has demonstrated expertise across 26 primary practice areas, with significant experience in fiduciary duties and corporate litigation.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Fiduciary Duties	4 cases	12% of total caseload	Highly Specialized76% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Derivative action	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Banking Secrecy	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Vexatious litigants	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Locus Standi	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Inherent Power of the Court	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Minority Shareholders Rights	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Proper Plaintiff Rule	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fraud on the Minority	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Dispute Resolution	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Dawn Wee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Dawn Wee has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Rajah & Tann	4 cases	80% of cases	Attorney-General v Tee Kok Boon: Vexatious Litigant Restraint Order(Dec 2007) Susilawati v American Express Bank: Undue Influence & Banking Secrecy(Oct 2007) Ting Sing Ning v Ting Chek Swee: Derivative Action, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Fraud on Minority Exception(Oct 2007)
Rajah & Tann LLP	1 cases	20% of cases	Susilawati v American Express Bank: Breach of Fiduciary Duty & Undue Influence Claims(Feb 2009)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Dawn Wee's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.7
Complex Cases: 2 (40%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	23.0 parties avg	3.0	40%
Won	34.0 parties avg	4.0	60%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2006	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2007	32.7 parties avg	2.7
2009	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

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

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2006	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2007	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2009	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 5 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Susilawati v American Express Bank: Breach of Fiduciary Duty & Undue Influence Claims 26 Feb 2009 American Express Bank Ltd (Respondent)Won	26 Feb 2009	American Express Bank Ltd (Respondent): Appeal dismissedAppeal dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent on a contractual basis.
2	Attorney-General v Tee Kok Boon: Vexatious Litigant Restraint Order 27 Dec 2007 Tee Kok Boon (Respondent)Lost	27 Dec 2007	Tee Kok Boon (Respondent): Order Granted Against RespondentAn order was granted against Tee Kok Boon, restraining him from instituting criminal legal proceedings related to his conviction without the High Court's leave.
3	Susilawati v American Express Bank: Undue Influence & Banking Secrecy 17 Oct 2007 American Express Bank Ltd (Defendant)Won	17 Oct 2007	American Express Bank Ltd (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment in favor of the defendant; plaintiff's claim dismissed with costs to the defendant on a standard basis. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Ting Sing Ning v Ting Chek Swee: Derivative Action, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Fraud on Minority Exception 08 Oct 2007 Ting Chek Swee (alias Ting Chik Sui) (Respondent)Lost	08 Oct 2007	Ting Chek Swee (alias Ting Chik Sui) (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe respondent's position was overturned as the appeal was allowed.
5	Ting Sing Ning v Ting Chek Swee: Locus Standi in Shareholder Fraud Claim 26 Oct 2006 Gerhard Tesan Binti (Defendant)Won	26 Oct 2006	Gerhard Tesan Binti (Defendant): Judgment in favor of DefendantJudgment in favor of the defendant, with costs to follow the event and to be taxed if not agreed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.