Dylan Lee

Dylan Lee is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2001 to 2003. The lawyer has handled 9 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in bills of lading act and injunctions. Their track record shows a 56.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 3 complex cases, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Dylan Lee has demonstrated expertise across 45 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and shipping law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	5 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced56% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Shipping Law	4 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced69% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Company Law	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice18% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	3 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Bills of Lading Act	3 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	3 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Costs	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Premises Liability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Workers Compensation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Dylan Lee 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	Experienced50% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Non est factum	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Natural forum	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conversion	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mistake	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Statutory Duty	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conflict of Laws	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Occupiers' Liability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Central Provident Fund Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Central Provident Fund Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Dylan Lee 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	Experienced60% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Forum Non Conveniens	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insurance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insurance Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mareva Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Dylan Lee has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Dylan Lee 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

Dylan Lee has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 8 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Shook Lin & Bok	8 cases	89% of cases	Golden Shore Transportation v UCO Bank: Stay of Proceedings & Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause(Oct 2003) UCO Bank v Golden Shore Transportation: Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause & Forum Non Conveniens(Jun 2003) UCO Bank v Golden Orient Maritime: Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause & Forum Non Conveniens(Jun 2003)
Shook Lin and Bok	1 cases	11% of cases	UCO Bank v Golden View Maritime: Mareva Injunction & Dissipation of Assets(Oct 2003)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Dylan Lee's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.0
Complex Cases: 3 (33%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	32.0 parties avg	2.0	33%
Neutral	14.0 parties avg	4.0	11%
Won	53.4 parties avg	3.4	56%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2001	25.5 parties avg	5.5
2002	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2003	62.3 parties avg	2.3

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(33%)	33%
Neutral	1(11%)	11%
Won	5(56%)	56%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	3,691,164.23	738,232.855 cases	5

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2001	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2002	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2003	6 24	Lost: 2 cases (33.3%) Won: 4 cases (66.7%)

Case History

Displaying all 9 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	UCO Bank v Golden View Maritime: Mareva Injunction & Dissipation of Assets 30 Oct 2003 UCO Bank (Plaintiff)Lost	30 Oct 2003	UCO Bank (Plaintiff): Application DismissedThe Plaintiffs' application for a Mareva injunction was dismissed. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Golden Shore Transportation v UCO Bank: Stay of Proceedings & Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause 22 Oct 2003 UCO Bank (Respondent)Won	22 Oct 2003	UCO Bank (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs.
3	UCO Bank v Golden Shore Transportation: Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause & Forum Non Conveniens 24 Jun 2003 UCO Bank (Plaintiff, Appellant)Won	24 Jun 2003	UCO Bank (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal allowedPlaintiffs' appeal allowed. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
4	UCO Bank v Golden Orient Maritime: Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause & Forum Non Conveniens 24 Jun 2003 UCO Bank (Plaintiff, Appellant)Won	24 Jun 2003	UCO Bank (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal AllowedPlaintiff's appeal was allowed.
5	Standard Chartered Bank v Uniden Systems: Wife's Guarantee & Undue Influence 27 Apr 2003 Standard Chartered Bank (Plaintiff)Won	27 Apr 2003	Standard Chartered Bank (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff for the sum of $3,691,164.23, plus interest at the contractual rate, plus costs on an indemnity basis. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Progress Software v CPF Board: Interpretation of 'Payable' under CPF Act 27 Feb 2003 Progress Software Corp (S) Pte Ltd (Appellant)Lost	27 Feb 2003	Progress Software Corp (S) Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs awarded to the respondent. The currency is assumed to be SGD, the currency of Singapore.
7	Progress Software v Central Provident Board: CPF Contributions & Wage Classification 07 Aug 2002 Progress Software Corp (S) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	07 Aug 2002	Progress Software Corp (S) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Application DismissedPlaintiff's application was dismissed with costs to be taxed if not agreed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Wong Jin Fah v L &M Prestressing: Insurance Coverage Dispute 28 Sep 2001 Wong Jin Fah (Plaintiff)Neutral	28 Sep 2001	Wong Jin Fah (Plaintiff): No outcome information provided in the text.No outcome information provided in the text.
9	Wong Jin Fah v L & M Prestressing: Construction Site Accident, Breach of Statutory Duty, Negligence, Occupier's Liability 30 Aug 2001 Wong Jin Fah (suing by his next friend Ho Chia Hao) (Plaintiff)Won	30 Aug 2001	Wong Jin Fah (suing by his next friend Ho Chia Hao) (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffInterlocutory judgment awarded against the first, third, and fourth defendants. Damages to be assessed by the Registrar at a later stage.