Gino Hardial Singh

Gino Hardial Singh is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2016 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 10 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 5 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and misuse of drugs act. They have managed 4 complex cases, representing 40% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated expertise across 40 primary practice areas, with significant experience in criminal law and criminal procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Criminal Law	7 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	6 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	5 cases	8% of total caseload	Highly Specialized97% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	5 cases	8% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh 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	Experienced68% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Penal Code	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Natural justice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Admissibility of evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Res Judicata	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Sexual Offences	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized98% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Drug Trafficking	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh 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	Experienced60% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal conspiracy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
House-trespass	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Bail Review	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Henderson v Henderson doctrine	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Double Jeopardy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Foreign Illegality	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Remittance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Remittance Services	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Unlicensed Money Changer	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Courts and Jurisdiction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Presumption of Knowledge	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Revision	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mareva Injunctions	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Theft	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Gino Hardial Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Gino Hardial Singh has been affiliated with 5 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Abbots Chambers LLC	5 cases	50% of cases	Public Prosecutor v. CGA: Sexual Offences, Sentencing Principles(May 2024) PP v Muhammad Rais: Importation of Methamphetamine under Misuse of Drugs Act(May 2022) Lyu Yan v Lim Tien Chiang: Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation, and Conspiracy in Cross-Border Remittance(Jul 2020)
Eugene Thuraisingam LLP	2 cases	20% of cases	PP v Ravan: Misuse of Drugs Act Sentencing for Cannabis Trafficking(Apr 2018) Masoud Rahimi v Public Prosecutor: Misuse of Drugs Act & Trafficking(Dec 2016)
Prestige Legal LLP	1 cases	10% of cases	PP v Ranjit Singh Gill: Trafficking of Diamorphine under Misuse of Drugs Act(Oct 2016)
Abbotts Chambers LLC	1 cases	10% of cases	PP v Imran, Pragas, Tamil: Drug Trafficking Conspiracy under Misuse of Drugs Act(Jul 2019)
Prestige Law LLP	1 cases	10% of cases	Kho Jabing v Public Prosecutor: Reopening Concluded Appeals and Natural Justice in Sentencing(May 2016)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Gino Hardial Singh's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.0
Complex Cases: 4 (40%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	93.0 parties avg	3.0	90%
Partial	13.0 parties avg	3.0	10%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2016	32.7 parties avg	2.7
2018	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2019	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2020	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2022	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2024	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Gino Hardial Singh's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	9(90%)	90%
Partial	1(10%)	10%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
USD	3,000,000.00	3,000,000.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2016	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Partial: 1 cases (33.3%)
2018	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2019	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 10 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Public Prosecutor v. CGA: Sexual Offences, Sentencing Principles 16 May 2024 CGA (Defendant)Lost	16 May 2024	CGA (Defendant): Convicted and SentencedAccused was convicted of three charges and sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane for each of the aggravated sexual assault by penetration charge, and two years’ imprisonment and three strokes of the cane for the aggravated outrage of modesty charge. The imprisonment terms for the two aggravated sexual assault by penetration charges are to run consecutively and the imprisonment term for the aggravated outrage of modesty charge is to run concurrently.
2	PP v Muhammad Rais: Importation of Methamphetamine under Misuse of Drugs Act 16 May 2022 Muhammad Rais bin Abdul Rashid (Defendant)Lost	16 May 2022	Muhammad Rais bin Abdul Rashid (Defendant): Sentence of 25 years’ imprisonment and 15 strokes of the caneAccused sentenced to 25 years’ imprisonment and 15 strokes of the cane, backdated to 31 March 2018.
3	Lyu Yan v Lim Tien Chiang: Breach of Contract, Misrepresentation, and Conspiracy in Cross-Border Remittance 19 Jul 2020 Lim Tien Chiang (Defendant)Lost	19 Jul 2020	Lim Tien Chiang (Defendant): Liable for Breach of Contract, Negligence, and Unjust EnrichmentLiable for US$3 million for breach of contract, or RMB20,970,000 jointly and severally with Jonathan and Derek, and RMB105,000 solely, for negligence and unjust enrichment.
4	PP v Imran, Pragas, Tamil: Drug Trafficking Conspiracy under Misuse of Drugs Act 01 Jul 2019 Pragas Krissamy (Defendant)Lost	01 Jul 2019	Pragas Krissamy (Defendant): ConvictedConvicted under s 5(1)(a) of the MDA read with s 34 of the Penal Code for trafficking in not less than 19.42g of diamorphine and sentenced to death.
5	Lyu Yan v Lim Tien Chiang: Injunction for Misrepresentation, Fraud, and Unjust Enrichment 21 Jan 2019 Lim Tien Chiang (Defendant)Lost	21 Jan 2019	Lim Tien Chiang (Defendant): Injunction grantedAn injunction was granted against the defendant.
6	Nur Jihad bin Rosli v Public Prosecutor: Criminal Trespass and Theft 04 Oct 2018 Nur Jihad bin Rosli (Appellant)Lost	04 Oct 2018	Nur Jihad bin Rosli (Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe Appellant's appeal against his conviction was dismissed.
7	PP v Ravan: Misuse of Drugs Act Sentencing for Cannabis Trafficking 25 Apr 2018 Noor Azmi bin A Rahman (Defendant)Lost	25 Apr 2018	Noor Azmi bin A Rahman (Defendant): Guilty plea entered; sentenced to 25 years of imprisonment and 15 strokes of the caneNoor Azmi was convicted of trafficking by delivering to Ilango three blocks of vegetable matter containing not less than 499.99 grams of cannabis.
8	Masoud Rahimi v Public Prosecutor: Misuse of Drugs Act & Trafficking 29 Dec 2016 Mogan Raj Terapadisamy (Appellant)Lost	29 Dec 2016	Mogan Raj Terapadisamy (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.
9	PP v Ranjit Singh Gill: Trafficking of Diamorphine under Misuse of Drugs Act 05 Oct 2016 Ranjit Singh Gill Menjeet Singh (Defendant)Partial	05 Oct 2016	Ranjit Singh Gill Menjeet Singh (Defendant): Partial LossConvicted of drug trafficking but avoided the death penalty, receiving life imprisonment and caning instead.
10	Kho Jabing v Public Prosecutor: Reopening Concluded Appeals and Natural Justice in Sentencing 18 May 2016 Kho Jabing (Applicant)Lost	18 May 2016	Kho Jabing (Applicant): Application dismissedThe applicant's motion to set aside the sentence of death was dismissed.