Harry Zheng

Harry Zheng is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2016 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in failure of consideration and restitution. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Harry Zheng has demonstrated expertise across 13 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and failure of consideration.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	3 cases	17% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 17% of their total caseload.
Failure of consideration	2 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Restitution	2 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Stay of Proceedings	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Joint Venture	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Total failure of consideration	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Formation of contract	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Harry Zheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Harry Zheng has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Selvam LLC	2 cases	67% of cases	Benzline Auto v Supercars: Restitution for Failure of Consideration in Car Sub-Dealership Dispute(Jan 2018) Supercars Lorinser v Benzline Auto: Failure of Basis in Exclusive Dealership Agreement(Dec 2016)
Kelvin Chia Partnership	1 cases	33% of cases	Moveon Technologies v Crystal-Moveon Technologies: Stay of Proceedings under Arbitration Act(Jan 2024)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Harry Zheng's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.8
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	22.7 parties avg	2.7	67%
Won	13.0 parties avg	3.0	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2016	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2018	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2024	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(67%)	67%
Won	1(33%)	33%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	600,000.00	300,000.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Moveon Technologies v Crystal-Moveon Technologies: Stay of Proceedings under Arbitration Act 15 Jan 2024 Crystal-Moveon Technologies Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	15 Jan 2024	Crystal-Moveon Technologies Pte Ltd (Defendant): Application dismissed.Defendant's application to stay proceedings was dismissed. The currency is assumed to be SGD, the currency of Singapore.
2	Benzline Auto v Supercars: Restitution for Failure of Consideration in Car Sub-Dealership Dispute 07 Jan 2018 Supercars Singapore Pte Ltd (Respondent)Lost	07 Jan 2018	Supercars Singapore Pte Ltd (Respondent): Claim DismissedSupercars' claim for restitution of $300,000 was dismissed.
3	Supercars Lorinser v Benzline Auto: Failure of Basis in Exclusive Dealership Agreement 22 Dec 2016 Supercars Singapore Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	22 Dec 2016	Supercars Singapore Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Claim AllowedThe Plaintiff's claim for the repayment of $300,000 was allowed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).