G Raman

G Raman is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2019. The lawyer has handled 14 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 5 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in arbitration and succession law. Their track record shows a 14.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 4 complex cases, representing 29% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

G Raman has demonstrated expertise across 65 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and breach of contract.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	7 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	5 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced66% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced64% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized86% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Company Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice47% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Succession Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized79% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Wills and Probate	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Will Interpretation	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced71% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Family Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Estate Administration	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized89% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Maintenance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Disciplinary Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contractual terms	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Illegality and public policy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Stay of Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	G Raman 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	Experienced70% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Financial Reporting Standards	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Illegality	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Accounting Irregularities	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	G Raman 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	General Practice30% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wills	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Professional Negligence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Matrimonial Property	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Deeds of Family Arrangement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Professional Ethics	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duty	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Gambling Debt	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Auditing	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Auditing Negligence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Asset Management	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Adverse Possession	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Joint Venture Agreement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Maritime Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Audited Accounts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commission Agreement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Auditing Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized92% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trespass to property	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Gaming contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Accounting and Inquiry	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
General Management Consultancy Services	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Casinos and Gambling	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Leasing	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Divorce	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Land Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Property Damage	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Performance Bond	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	G Raman has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	G Raman 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

G Raman has been affiliated with 5 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 6 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
G Raman & Partners	6 cases	43% of cases	Anwar Siraj v Ting Kang Chung: Challenge to Arbitrator's Impartiality and Competence in Construction Dispute(Mar 2003) Colombo Dockyard v. Metro Maritime: Recovery of Funds & Illegality in Contract(Dec 2002) Anwar Siraj v Teo Hee Lai: Unconscionability in Performance Bond Call(Nov 2002)
G R Law Corporation	5 cases	36% of cases	Ng Tsorng Chinn v Vijaykumar Nanalal Shah: Adverse Possession Claim over Land Lot(Mar 2012) O'Connor v Potter: Division of Matrimonial Assets and Maintenance in Divorce(Nov 2009) ADG v ADH: Construction of Will, Lapse of Residuary Gift, Intestate Succession Act(Sep 2009)
Withers KhattarWong LLP	1 cases	7% of cases	UVH v UVJ: Fiduciary Duty Breach by Executors & Account of Profits(Jun 2019)
KhattarWong LLP	1 cases	7% of cases	Kuek Siang Wei v Kuek Siew Chew: Setting Aside Deed of Consent in Family Arrangement Dispute(Aug 2015)
Loh Eben Ong & Partners	1 cases	7% of cases	Tay Kim Chuan Patrick v Public Accountants Board: Auditor's Duty, Professional Misconduct & Standard of Care(Jan 2002)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of G Raman's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.7
Complex Cases: 4 (29%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	82.7 parties avg	2.7	57%
Neutral	27.0 parties avg	7.0	14%
Partial	24.0 parties avg	4.0	14%
Won	22.7 parties avg	2.7	14%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2001	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2002	32.5 parties avg	2.5
2003	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2007	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2008	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2009	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2012	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2019	18.0 parties avg	8.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	8(57%)	57%
Neutral	2(14%)	14%
Partial	2(14%)	14%
Won	2(14%)	14%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	60,525.00	5,502.2711 cases	11
USD	649,187.50	649,187.501 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2001	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2002	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2003	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2007	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	2 2	Partial: 2 cases (100.0%)
2012	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 14 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	UVH v UVJ: Fiduciary Duty Breach by Executors & Account of Profits 02 Jun 2019 UVQ (Defendant)Neutral	02 Jun 2019	UVQ (Defendant): NeutralJoined in their capacities as executors of the Mother's estate (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Kuek Siang Wei v Kuek Siew Chew: Setting Aside Deed of Consent in Family Arrangement Dispute 12 Aug 2015 Kuek Tsing Hsia (Appellant)Lost	12 Aug 2015	Kuek Tsing Hsia (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; ordered to pay costs of $20,000 to the respondent (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	Ng Tsorng Chinn v Vijaykumar Nanalal Shah: Adverse Possession Claim over Land Lot 14 Mar 2012 Vijaykumar Nanalal Shah (executor of the estate of Nanalal Shamji Shah, deceased) (Defendant)Lost	14 Mar 2012	Vijaykumar Nanalal Shah (executor of the estate of Nanalal Shamji Shah, deceased) (Defendant): Claim DismissedThe Deceased’s title to Plot D was extinguished by adverse possession. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	O'Connor v Potter: Division of Matrimonial Assets and Maintenance in Divorce 17 Nov 2009 O'Connor Rosamund Monica (Plaintiff)Partial	17 Nov 2009	O'Connor Rosamund Monica (Plaintiff): Two-thirds share in the matrimonial homeAwarded two-thirds share in the matrimonial home.
5	ADG v ADH: Construction of Will, Lapse of Residuary Gift, Intestate Succession Act 27 Sep 2009 D (Intervener)Partial	27 Sep 2009	D (Intervener): PartialThe court agreed that the gift had lapsed but disagreed with the 4th Intervener's construction that the lapsed gift passes as on an intestacy. The interveners are to bear their own costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Ting Kang Chung John v Teo Hee Lai: Discovery, Interlocutory Applications & Hampering Adjudication 09 Apr 2008 Khoo Cheng Neo Norma (Defendant)Neutral	09 Apr 2008	Khoo Cheng Neo Norma (Defendant): NeutralThe third defendant, wife of the second defendant, is legally represented and was served the applications by the second defendant. Her counsel merely associated himself with the second defendant’s submissions and did not wish to ask for costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Anwar Siraj v Teo Hee Lai: Stay of Proceedings in Favor of Arbitration 27 Feb 2007 Khoo Cheng Neo Norma (Plaintiff, Appellant)Lost	27 Feb 2007	Khoo Cheng Neo Norma (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs fixed at $4,500 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
8	Anwar Siraj v Ting Kang Chung: Challenge to Arbitrator's Impartiality and Competence in Construction Dispute 23 Mar 2003 Khoo Cheng Neo Norma (Applicant)Lost	23 Mar 2003	Khoo Cheng Neo Norma (Applicant): Motion DismissedOriginating Motion dismissed; Applicants ordered to pay 90% of costs to the arbitrator and costs of the application to the Second Respondent. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	Colombo Dockyard v. Metro Maritime: Recovery of Funds & Illegality in Contract 06 Dec 2002 Athula Anthony Jayasinghe trading as Metro Maritime Services (Defendant)Lost	06 Dec 2002	Athula Anthony Jayasinghe trading as Metro Maritime Services (Defendant): Claim DismissedJudgment against the Defendant for US$649,187.50 plus interest. The defendant's claim that he disbursed the monies for the benefit or on behalf of the plaintiffs was rejected.
10	Anwar Siraj v Teo Hee Lai: Unconscionability in Performance Bond Call 24 Nov 2002 Norma Khoo Cheng Neo (Appellant)Won	24 Nov 2002	Norma Khoo Cheng Neo (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed with costs. The injunction restraining the appellant from making a demand under the performance bond was set aside. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
11	Tay Kim Chuan Patrick v Public Accountants Board: Auditor's Duty, Professional Misconduct & Standard of Care 16 Jan 2002 Tay Kim Chuan Patrick (Appellant)Lost	16 Jan 2002	Tay Kim Chuan Patrick (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
12	Batie v Tan: Breach of Contract and Trespass Dispute over Rental Property 30 Aug 2001 Tan Boon Hock (Defendant)Lost	30 Aug 2001	Tan Boon Hock (Defendant): Judgment against DefendantJudgment against Defendant in the sum of $51,525, with interest at 6% from date of writ (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
13	China Women Industry Development Corporation v Singapower Development: Commission Dispute Over China Investments 22 Mar 2001 China Women Industry Development Corporation (Plaintiff)Lost	22 Mar 2001	China Women Industry Development Corporation (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedThe plaintiff's claim for US$500,000 commission was dismissed with costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
14	Quek Chiau Beng v Phua Swee Pah Jimmy: Recovery of Gambling Debt & Illegality of Gaming Contracts 23 Nov 2000 Phua Swee Pah Jimmy (Defendant, Respondent)Won	23 Nov 2000	Phua Swee Pah Jimmy (Defendant, Respondent): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; the defendant is awarded costs for the appeal to the district judge and the High Court. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.