Edmund Kronenburg

Edmund Kronenburg is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 35 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 8 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in family law and negligence. Their track record shows a 29.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 11 complex cases, representing 31% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated expertise across 148 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and costs.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	20 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 20 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Costs	10 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 10 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	9 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 9 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	8 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced66% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	8 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice42% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 8 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Company Law	8 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	7 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	6 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice41% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Family Law	5 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized82% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	5 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligence	5 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	5 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice44% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	5 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced66% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Medical Malpractice	5 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized82% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	4 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Medical Negligence	4 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized94% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	4 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice27% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Security for Costs	4 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized89% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	4 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	4 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice36% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appeal	4 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Divorce	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized92% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Causation	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Duty of Care	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced61% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice36% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Maintenance	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wills and Probate	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Torts	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Child Custody	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Real Estate	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Limitation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Pre-action discovery	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Urology	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Assets	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Director's Duties	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Confidence	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judicial Management	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Damages	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wrongful Death	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Offers to Settle	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duty	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Trust Assets	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Express Trust	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Dependency Claim	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Trusts — Constructive trusts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Trusts — Express trusts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Informed consent	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Estate Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Singapore International Arbitration Centre	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Administration of Assets	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Bills of Exchange Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Joinder of Parties	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Inter vivos	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Variation of Order	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Deed of Family Arrangement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Deeds	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Effective Cause	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Medical Misdiagnosis	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Statistical Evidence	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Loss of Inheritance Claim	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Probate	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Pathology	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Commission	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Post-operative care	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Law of Wills	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Deeds of Renunciation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Certificate of Inheritance	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Probate Administration	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Wills Act	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Loss of Inheritance	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Data Protection	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Computer Misuse	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Estate	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction of Tribunal	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Choice of Remedies	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction Challenge	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Defective Goods	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Fertility treatment	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Sale and Leaseback	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Marketing Agent	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Sale of Goods Act	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Floating Charge	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Interim Orders	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Interlocutory Appeals	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Translation Service Business	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Cost Order	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Infertility	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Agency and Distributorships	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Child Support	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Citizenship	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice1% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Corporate Governance	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Domestic Violence	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Restraining Orders	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Shareholder Disputes	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Gifts Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Estate Administration	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Testamentary Capacity	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Maintenance (Wife)	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Maintenance (Child)	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Contempt of Court	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Stay of Execution	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration Act	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Will Execution	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Disclosure Obligations	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Expert evidence	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Mistake	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Arbitral Awards	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Companies Act	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Shares	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Unreasonable Behaviour	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Children's Welfare	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Disclosure of documents	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Succession Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Will Interpretation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Amendments	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Affidavits	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Gifts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Professional Ethics	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Loan Agreement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Intestacy	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Personal representatives	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Edmund Kronenburg has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Edmund Kronenburg has been affiliated with 8 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 12 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Braddell Brothers LLP	12 cases	34% of cases	Wang Piao v Lee Wee Ching: Amendment of Defence Post-Summary Judgment(Aug 2023) Sheng Ling Huo v Orthosports@Novena: Medical Negligence and Informed Consent in Knee Replacement Surgery(Jul 2022) VIK v VIL: Estate Administration, Property Sale, and Beneficiary Rights(Aug 2020)
Tan Peng Chin LLC	9 cases	26% of cases	Yeow Chern Lean v Neo Kok Eng: Conversion Claim - Locus Standi and Conditional Delivery of Cheques(Jun 2009) Lian Hwee Choo Phebe v Maxz Universal: Share Issuance, Articles of Association & Statutory Interpretation(Jan 2009) Acclaim Insurance Brokers v Navigator Investment Services: Stay of Proceedings & Arbitration(Jan 2009)
Drew & Napier	6 cases	17% of cases	Tan Hun Hoe v Harte Denis Mathew: Negligence, Damages, and Costs in Post-Operative Care(Oct 2001) Pai Lily v Yeo Peng Hock Henry: Medical Negligence, Limitation Act, and Causation in Eye Infection Case(Mar 2001) Harte v Tan: Negligence, Medical Malpractice & Costs in Fertility Treatment(Jan 2001)
Drew & Napier LLC	3 cases	9% of cases	Wishing Star Ltd v Jurong Town Corp: Security for Costs & Company Residency(Oct 2003) Yeo Peng Hock Henry v Pai Lily: Costs Settlement in Appeal(Nov 2001) Yeo Peng Hock Henry v Pai Lily: Medical Negligence, Doctor's Duty of Care & Causation(Oct 2001)
Braddell Brothers	2 cases	6% of cases	Ng Bee Keong v Ng Choon Huay: Testamentary Capacity and Validity of Wills(May 2013) Maxz Universal v Lian: Breach of Director's Duties & Conflict of Interest in Company Financial Disputes(Feb 2010)
Drew and Napier LLC	1 cases	3% of cases	Jurong Town Corp v Wishing Star Ltd: Security for Costs & Admission of Fresh Evidence in Interlocutory Appeals(Mar 2004)
Goh Phai Cheng LLC	1 cases	3% of cases	Armstrong v Quest Laboratories: Negligence, Causation, and Damages in Medical Tort(Mar 2018)
Sam Koh & Co	1 cases	3% of cases	Ong Jane Rebecca v Pricewaterhousecoopers: Security for Costs & Access to Courts(Feb 2009)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Edmund Kronenburg's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.8
Complex Cases: 11 (31%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	123.6 parties avg	3.6	34%
Neutral	24.0 parties avg	4.0	6%
Partial	117.6 parties avg	7.6	31%
Won	102.9 parties avg	2.9	29%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2001	52.4 parties avg	2.4
2003	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2004	312.3 parties avg	12.3
2005	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2006	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2007	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	43.8 parties avg	3.8
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2012	26.5 parties avg	6.5
2013	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2014	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2015	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2016	25.0 parties avg	5.0
2018	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2019	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2020	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2022	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2023	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	12(34%)	34%
Neutral	2(6%)	6%
Partial	11(31%)	31%
Won	10(29%)	29%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	3,727,368.90	207,076.0518 cases	18

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	3 3	Partial: 3 cases (100.0%)
2001	5 1121	Lost: 1 cases (20.0%) Neutral: 1 cases (20.0%) Partial: 2 cases (40.0%) Won: 1 cases (20.0%)
2003	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2004	3 12	Partial: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2005	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2007	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	4 121	Lost: 1 cases (25.0%) Partial: 2 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2010	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2012	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2013	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)
2014	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)
2015	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 35 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Wang Piao v Lee Wee Ching: Amendment of Defence Post-Summary Judgment 03 Aug 2023 Wang Piao (Claimant)Won	03 Aug 2023	Wang Piao (Claimant): Application dismissedThe defendant's application to amend his defence was dismissed.
2	Sheng Ling Huo v Orthosports@Novena: Medical Negligence and Informed Consent in Knee Replacement Surgery 11 Jul 2022 Sheng Ling Huo (Appellant)Lost	11 Jul 2022	Sheng Ling Huo (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs to be taxed if not agreed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	VIK v VIL: Estate Administration, Property Sale, and Beneficiary Rights 18 Aug 2020 VIP (Defendant)Neutral	18 Aug 2020	VIP (Defendant): Aligned with PlaintiffAligned with the Administrator’s position that Property 2 should be sold.
4	Armstrong v Quest Laboratories: Negligence, Duty of Care, and Causation in Misdiagnosis of Melanoma 25 Nov 2019 Armstrong Carol Ann (Appellant, Respondent)Partial	25 Nov 2019	Armstrong Carol Ann (Appellant, Respondent): Appeal Allowed in PartAppeal allowed in part regarding the Causation Question and the Damages Question.
5	Armstrong v Quest Laboratories: Negligence, Causation, and Damages in Medical Tort 20 Mar 2018 Armstrong Carol Ann (Plaintiff)Won	20 Mar 2018	Armstrong Carol Ann (Plaintiff): Judgment for the PlaintiffThe plaintiff was awarded $1,241,334 in damages (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Success Elegant Trading v La Dolce Vita: Pre-Action Discovery & Fraud 14 Aug 2016 Success Elegant Trading Limited (Appellant, Defendant)Lost	14 Aug 2016	Success Elegant Trading Limited (Appellant, Defendant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed and orders of the AR affirmed. Costs awarded to the Plaintiffs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	La Dolce Vita v Deutsche Bank: Pre-Action Discovery & Tracing Fraudulent Transfers 25 Feb 2016 Success Elegant Trading Limited (Defendant)Lost	25 Feb 2016	Success Elegant Trading Limited (Defendant): Discovery order madeRequired to disclose documents related to accounts held by Zhang Lan and Success Elegant Trading Limited.
8	ANB v ANC: Breach of Confidence & Surreptitious Data Copying in Divorce Proceedings 20 Aug 2015 ANB (Appellant)Won	20 Aug 2015	ANB (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed and an interlocutory injunction was granted.
9	ANB v ANC: Illegally Obtained Evidence & Exclusionary Discretion in Civil Proceedings 09 Sep 2014 ANB (Plaintiff)Partial	09 Sep 2014	ANB (Plaintiff): Application dismissed in partThe plaintiff's application to prevent the defendants from using the material obtained from his laptop was dismissed in part.
10	Woo Kah Wai v Chew Ai Hua: Pre-Option Contract Breach & Option to Purchase Dispute 31 Jul 2014 Lum Pic Yee Joyce (Appellant, Respondent)Lost	31 Jul 2014	Lum Pic Yee Joyce (Appellant, Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed. Vendors to bear 50% of the Purchaser’s costs in relation to Civil Appeal No 83 of 2013. No costs order in relation to Civil Appeal No 84 of 2013. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
11	PT First Media TBK v Astro Nusantara: Enforcement of Singapore Int'l Arbitration Award & Jurisdictional Challenge 30 Oct 2013 PT First Media TBK (formerly known as PT Broadband Multimedia TBK) (Appellant, Defendant)Partial	30 Oct 2013	PT First Media TBK (formerly known as PT Broadband Multimedia TBK) (Appellant, Defendant): Appeal Allowed in PartAppeal allowed in part, leave to enforce the Awards in both OS 807/2010 and OS 913/2010 is refused in relation to the Tribunal’s orders in the Awards that purport to apply as between PT First Media TBK and the 6th to 8th Respondents. Leave to enforce is granted only in relation to the Tribunal’s orders which are exclusively directed at the 1st to 5th Respondents.
12	Ng Bee Keong v Ng Choon Huay: Testamentary Capacity and Validity of Wills 13 May 2013 Eng Tet Hwa (Defendant)Lost	13 May 2013	Eng Tet Hwa (Defendant): Claim DismissedThe defendant's challenge to the Second Will was dismissed.
13	Astro Nusantara v PT Ayunda: Enforcement of International Arbitration Awards & Jurisdictional Challenges 21 Oct 2012 PT First Media TBK (formerly known as PT Broadband Multimedia TBK) (Defendant)Lost	21 Oct 2012	PT First Media TBK (formerly known as PT Broadband Multimedia TBK) (Defendant): Summonses DismissedFM's summonses to set aside the Enforcement Orders were dismissed.
14	AZB v AYZ: Relocation of Child after Divorce - Best Interests of Child & Primary Caregiver's Well-being 20 May 2012 AZB (Appellant, Defendant)Lost	20 May 2012	AZB (Appellant, Defendant): Appeal DismissedAppeal against the District Judge's decision to allow the wife to relocate to the US with their child was dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
15	Maxz Universal v Lian: Breach of Director's Duties & Conflict of Interest in Company Financial Disputes 25 Feb 2010 Maxz Universal Development Group Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	25 Feb 2010	Maxz Universal Development Group Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedThe plaintiff's claims for breach of director's duties were dismissed with costs to the defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
16	Yeow Chern Lean v Neo Kok Eng: Conversion Claim - Locus Standi and Conditional Delivery of Cheques 25 Jun 2009 Yeow Chern Lean (Appellant, Defendant)Partial	25 Jun 2009	Yeow Chern Lean (Appellant, Defendant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part regarding Suit 136 of 2007/L. The appellant succeeded on the issue of the proper claimant. The court dismissed the company's claim for overpayment of salary but upheld the company's right to summarily dismiss the appellant.
17	Ong Jane Rebecca v Pricewaterhousecoopers: Security for Costs & Access to Courts 05 Feb 2009 Ong Jane Rebecca (Plaintiff, Respondent)Partial	05 Feb 2009	Ong Jane Rebecca (Plaintiff, Respondent): Appeal Allowed in PartSecurity for costs reduced. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
18	Lian Hwee Choo Phebe v Maxz Universal: Share Issuance, Articles of Association & Statutory Interpretation 12 Jan 2009 Maxz Universal Development Group Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	12 Jan 2009	Maxz Universal Development Group Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal UpheldAppeal against the company was dismissed.
19	Acclaim Insurance Brokers v Navigator Investment Services: Stay of Proceedings & Arbitration 11 Jan 2009 Navigator Investment Services Ltd (Defendant)Lost	11 Jan 2009	Navigator Investment Services Ltd (Defendant): LostAppeal dismissed; costs to follow the event and to be taxed if not agreed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
20	Colliers International v Senkee Logistics: Agency Agreement & Commission Dispute 31 Jan 2007 Senkee Logistics Pte Ltd (Defendant)Won	31 Jan 2007	Senkee Logistics Pte Ltd (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment in favor of the defendant; the plaintiff's claim was dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
21	PT Muliakeramik v Nam Huat: Security for Costs & Overlapping Defence/Counterclaim 27 Aug 2006 PT Muliakeramik Indahraya TBK (Plaintiff)Won	27 Aug 2006	PT Muliakeramik Indahraya TBK (Plaintiff): Application for security for costs dismissedThe defendant's application for security for costs was dismissed.
22	Neo Corp Pte Ltd v Neocorp Innovations Pte Ltd: Liquidator's Right to Continue Judicial Manager's Unfair Preference Action 06 Apr 2006 Neo Corp Pte Ltd (in liquidation) (Appellant)Lost	06 Apr 2006	Neo Corp Pte Ltd (in liquidation) (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs to the respondent. The court held that the liquidator could not continue the action commenced by the judicial manager under s 227T of the Companies Act. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
23	Neo Corp v Neocorp Innovations: Judicial Management vs. Winding Up & Right of Action 07 Sep 2005 Neo Corp Pte Ltd (under judicial management) (Applicant)Lost	07 Sep 2005	Neo Corp Pte Ltd (under judicial management) (Applicant): Application DismissedThe court held that the liquidators of the company could not be authorized to continue its action under OS 1535/2004.
24	Lion City Holdings v Jumabhoy Asad: Amendment of Writ and Limitation Defence in Fiduciary Duty Claim 15 Jun 2004 Jumabhoy Iqbal (Defendant)Won	15 Jun 2004	Jumabhoy Iqbal (Defendant): Appeal AllowedThe defendant's appeal against the amendment of the writ was allowed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
25	Sakata v Naruse: Security for Costs Appeal After Change of Solicitors 13 May 2004 Netlock Technologies Japan KK (Plaintiff)Partial	13 May 2004	Netlock Technologies Japan KK (Plaintiff): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part; the court varied the assistant registrar’s orders by apportioning $50,000 (to cover the second defendant’s costs) from the sum of $375,000 and by setting aside the order for the provision of a further sum of $300,000. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
26	Jurong Town Corp v Wishing Star Ltd: Security for Costs & Admission of Fresh Evidence in Interlocutory Appeals 30 Mar 2004 Wishing Star Ltd (Respondent, Plaintiff)Won	30 Mar 2004	Wishing Star Ltd (Respondent, Plaintiff): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against WSL was dismissed, meaning WSL does not have to furnish security for costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
27	Wishing Star Ltd v Jurong Town Corp: Security for Costs & Company Residency 07 Oct 2003 Wishing Star Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	07 Oct 2003	Wishing Star Ltd (Plaintiff): Appeal dismissedThe defendants' appeal was dismissed, meaning the plaintiff was not required to provide security for costs.
28	Yeo Peng Hock Henry v Pai Lily: Costs Settlement in Appeal 06 Nov 2001 Pai Lily (Respondent)Neutral	06 Nov 2001	Pai Lily (Respondent): No order as to costsNo order as to costs made by the court (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
29	Yeo Peng Hock Henry v Pai Lily: Medical Negligence, Doctor's Duty of Care & Causation 25 Oct 2001 Pai Lily (Respondent)Lost	25 Oct 2001	Pai Lily (Respondent): Claim DismissedClaim dismissed due to failure to prove causation.
30	Tan Hun Hoe v Harte Denis Mathew: Negligence, Damages, and Costs in Post-Operative Care 12 Oct 2001 Harte Denis Mathew (Respondent, Appellant)Partial	12 Oct 2001	Harte Denis Mathew (Respondent, Appellant): Appeal Allowed in PartMr. Harte's appeal was allowed in part, with increased damages awarded. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the currency of the jurisdiction.
31	Pai Lily v Yeo Peng Hock Henry: Medical Negligence, Limitation Act, and Causation in Eye Infection Case 25 Mar 2001 Pai Lily (Plaintiff)Won	25 Mar 2001	Pai Lily (Plaintiff): Claim AllowedClaim allowed; damages to be assessed. The currency is assumed to be SGD, the currency of Singapore.
32	Harte v Tan: Negligence, Medical Malpractice & Costs in Fertility Treatment 30 Jan 2001 Denis Matthew Harte (Plaintiff)Partial	30 Jan 2001	Denis Matthew Harte (Plaintiff): Judgment for Plaintiff in partJudgment for the Plaintiff in part; damages awarded in the amount of S$96,600 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
33	Lee Yong Chuan Edwin v Tan Soan Lian: Division of Matrimonial Assets, Gift of Shares & Maintenance 04 Dec 2000 Tan Soan Lian (Respondent)Partial	04 Dec 2000	Tan Soan Lian (Respondent): Appeal dismissed in partAppeal dismissed in part regarding the division of the matrimonial home and the quantum of lump sum maintenance.
34	Harte v Tan: Medical Negligence, Varicocelectomy, and Testicular Atrophy 23 Nov 2000 Denis Matthew Harte (Plaintiff)Partial	23 Nov 2000	Denis Matthew Harte (Plaintiff): Judgment for Plaintiff in partPartial judgment in favor of the Plaintiff; damages awarded in the amount of $32,995.62 (SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
35	Tan Soan Lian v Edwin Lee Yong Chuan: Division of Matrimonial Assets and Wife's Maintenance in Divorce 14 Jun 2000 Tan Soan Lian (Petitioner, Respondent)Partial	14 Jun 2000	Tan Soan Lian (Petitioner, Respondent): Orders of the District Court varied regarding division of matrimonial assetsPetitioner to receive $2 million as her share of the property at Block 48 Henley Court, #06-04 Astrid Meadows, Coronation Road West, Singapore 269263. Petitioner to receive 25% of the value of other assets. (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore)