Ernest Balasubramaniam

Ernest Balasubramaniam is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2004 to 2017. The lawyer has handled 6 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and estate administration. Their track record shows a 17.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated expertise across 26 primary practice areas, with significant experience in property law and res judicata.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Property Law	4 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced64% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Res Judicata	4 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	3 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice17% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Easements	3 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Estate Administration	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Trust	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Succession Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Will Interpretation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Interest	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Adverse Possession	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Factual Possession	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Intention to Possess	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Animus Possidendi	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Rights of way	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Settlement Agreement	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Ernest Balasubramaniam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Ernest Balasubramaniam has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
UniLegal LLC	2 cases	33% of cases	Chiang Shirley v Chiang Dong Pheng: Appeal on Consent Judgment Variation and Estate Distribution(Jan 2017) Chiang Shirley v Chiang Dong Pheng: Dispute over Executor & Trustee of Mother's Estate(Apr 2015)
Arfat Selvam Alliance LLC	2 cases	33% of cases	Management Corporation v Lee Tat: Dispute over Right of Way and Reconstitution of Court of Appeal(Oct 2009) Grange Heights MCST v Lee Tat: Right of Way Dispute Over Servient Tenement(Mar 2007)
ASG Law Corporation	2 cases	33% of cases	Lee Tat v Management Corp: Issue Estoppel & Right of Way Dispute(Apr 2005) Lee Tat Development v Management Corp: Issue Estoppel & Right of Way Dispute(Sep 2004)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Ernest Balasubramaniam's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.0
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	42.0 parties avg	2.0	67%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	17%
Won	12.0 parties avg	2.0	17%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2004	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2005	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2007	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2017	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	4(67%)	67%
Partial	1(17%)	17%
Won	1(17%)	17%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2004	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2007	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 6 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Chiang Shirley v Chiang Dong Pheng: Appeal on Consent Judgment Variation and Estate Distribution 04 Jan 2017 Chiang Dong Pheng (Respondent)Lost	04 Jan 2017	Chiang Dong Pheng (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; ordered to pay interest at 5.33% per annum on the sum of $219,816.43 from 3 January 2015 to the date he either set-off or paid the Appellant the sums due to her. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Chiang Shirley v Chiang Dong Pheng: Dispute over Executor & Trustee of Mother's Estate 09 Apr 2015 Chiang Dong Pheng (Defendant)Partial	09 Apr 2015	Chiang Dong Pheng (Defendant): Counterclaim largely dismissedThe defendant's counterclaim was largely dismissed, except that the plaintiff is ordered to refrain from interfering with the issue of grant of probate to the defendant in respect of the Estate and to forthwith remove all caveats in respect of the Estate.
3	Management Corporation v Lee Tat: Dispute over Right of Way and Reconstitution of Court of Appeal 19 Oct 2009 Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd (Defendant)Won	19 Oct 2009	Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd (Defendant): Application DismissedThe plaintiff's application was dismissed, in favour of the defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Grange Heights MCST v Lee Tat: Right of Way Dispute Over Servient Tenement 04 Mar 2007 Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	04 Mar 2007	Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd (Defendant): Claim DismissedThe court dismissed the defendant's arguments and granted the declaration sought by the plaintiff.
5	Lee Tat v Management Corp: Issue Estoppel & Right of Way Dispute 11 Apr 2005 Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd (Appellant)Lost	11 Apr 2005	Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs; security deposit released to the respondent to account for its costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Lee Tat Development v Management Corp: Issue Estoppel & Right of Way Dispute 27 Sep 2004 Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant)Lost	27 Sep 2004	Lee Tat Development Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant): Prayers DismissedLee Tat's prayers for declarations and injunctions were dismissed due to issue estoppel.