Gary Low

Gary Low is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2002 to 2010. The lawyer has handled 10 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in strata title law and civil practice. Their track record shows a 55.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 6 complex cases, representing 60% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Gary Low has demonstrated expertise across 41 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and strata title law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	6 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice46% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Strata Title Law	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized84% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Property Law	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced62% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	3 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice46% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	3 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Mortgage Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Costs	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Knowing Receipt	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Dishonest assistance	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Trust	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mistake	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
En Bloc Sales	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Escrow Agreements	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Money Laundering	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Accessory liability	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Recipient liability	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Collective Sale	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Security Memorandum	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
McKenzie Friend	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Ad Hoc Admission	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Gary Low has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Gary Low has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 9 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Drew & Napier LLC	9 cases	90% of cases	Mohamed Amin v Lim Choon Thye: Collective Sale Approval & Costs Dispute(Nov 2010) Bidvest v Deacons: Escrow Agreement Dispute over US$4 Million Payout(Apr 2010) Zage v Ho: Knowing Receipt, Breach of Trust, and Solicitor Misappropriation(Feb 2010)
Drew and Napier LLC	1 cases	10% of cases	Wee Soon Kim Anthony v UBS AG: Appeal Dismissal & Time to File Appeal(Jan 2005)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Gary Low's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 7.6
Complex Cases: 6 (60%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Dismissed	18.0 parties avg	8.0	10%
Lost	23.0 parties avg	3.0	20%
Neutral	23.0 parties avg	3.0	20%
Won	69.3 parties avg	9.3	60%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2002	33.3 parties avg	3.3
2005	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2008	18.0 parties avg	8.0
2009	213.0 parties avg	13.0
2010	33.3 parties avg	3.3

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Dismissed	1(9%)	9%
Lost	2(18%)	18%
Neutral	2(18%)	18%
Won	6(55%)	55%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	273,333.33	54,666.675 cases	5

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2002	3 12	Lost: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2005	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	1 1	Dismissed: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2010	4 121	Lost: 1 cases (25.0%) Neutral: 2 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 10 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Mohamed Amin v Lim Choon Thye: Collective Sale Approval & Costs Dispute 17 Nov 2010 Mohamed Amin bin Mohamed Taib and others (Plaintiff)Neutral	17 Nov 2010	Mohamed Amin bin Mohamed Taib and others (Plaintiff): No order as to costsThe court determined that no order as to costs should be made in Originating Summons 17 of 2008.
2	Bidvest v Deacons: Escrow Agreement Dispute over US$4 Million Payout 26 Apr 2010 Deacons Singapore Ltd (Defendant)Won	26 Apr 2010	Deacons Singapore Ltd (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment in favor of Deacons; Bidvest's claim was dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Zage v Ho: Knowing Receipt, Breach of Trust, and Solicitor Misappropriation 09 Feb 2010 Jewels DeFred Pte Ltd (Respondent)Lost	09 Feb 2010	Jewels DeFred Pte Ltd (Respondent): Liable as trusteeDeFred is liable to account to the appellants as trustee for the sum transferred in the Cash Cheque ie, $270,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Mohamed Amin v Lim Choon Thye: Collective Sale Dispute over Unstamped Agreement 24 Sep 2009 Chin Thean Seong (Plaintiff)Won	24 Sep 2009	Chin Thean Seong (Plaintiff): Successful in defending the summonsThe Present Summons was dismissed with costs. The currency is assumed to be SGD, the currency of the jurisdiction.
5	Mohamed Amin v Lim Choon Thye: Interpretation of 'Proceeds of Sale' under Land Titles (Strata) Act for En Bloc Sale 02 Mar 2009 Chin Thean Seong (Plaintiff)Won	02 Mar 2009	Chin Thean Seong (Plaintiff): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed and the STB Application remitted back to the Board for a continuation of the Board’s proceedings.
6	Zage v Rasif: Dishonest Assistance & Knowing Receipt in Money Laundering via Precious Stones 29 Dec 2008 Jewels DeFred Pte Ltd (Defendant)Dismissed	29 Dec 2008	Jewels DeFred Pte Ltd (Defendant): Claim DismissedPlaintiffs' claims against Jewels DeFred Pte Ltd are dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Wee Soon Kim Anthony v UBS AG: Appeal Dismissal & Time to File Appeal 16 Jan 2005 UBS AG (Respondent)Won	16 Jan 2005	UBS AG (Respondent): Application to strike out appeal grantedApplication to strike out appeal granted with costs to be taxed and security deposit to be paid equally to the respondents. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore. Calculated amount is UBS AG's share of the security deposit.
8	ICB Ltd v P. D. International: Rectification of Security Memorandum for MEP Facilities 14 Nov 2002 Industrial & Commercial Bank Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	14 Nov 2002	Industrial & Commercial Bank Ltd (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedICB's claim for a declaration that the Twinwood shares stand as security for PDI's liability to ICB under the PDMI guarantee was dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	Wee Soon Kim Anthony v UBS AG: Right to Legal Representation for Litigants in Person 15 Sep 2002 UBS AG (Defendant, Respondent)Won	15 Sep 2002	UBS AG (Defendant, Respondent): Judgment for DefendantThe defendant successfully opposed the plaintiff's attempt to have a lawyer argue on his behalf as a friend.
10	Anthony Wee v UBS AG: Discovery, Banking Act, and Evidence Act in Foreign Exchange Transactions 06 Sep 2002 UBS AG (Defendant, Respondent)Won	06 Sep 2002	UBS AG (Defendant, Respondent): Application GrantedDefendant's application for orders under section 175 of the Evidence Act to inspect bank records was granted.