Ho Xin Ling

Ho Xin Ling is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2012 to 2016. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in fiduciary duties and fraud and deceit. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated expertise across 14 primary practice areas, with significant experience in company law and estoppel.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Company Law	3 cases	15% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 15% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	2 cases	10% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	10% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	2 cases	10% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	10% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Collective Sale	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Service Agreement	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Ho Xin Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Ho Xin Ling has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Tan Kok Quan Partnership	3 cases	100% of cases	UOB v Lippo Marina: Attribution of Fraudulent Employee Knowledge & Summary Determination of Law(Feb 2016) Maryani Sadeli v Arjun Permanand Samtani: Equitable Compensation & Breach of Fiduciary Duties in Horizon Towers Collective Sale(Nov 2014) Lim Suat Hua v Singapore HealthPartners: Breach of Contract & Fiduciary Duty Dispute(Mar 2012)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Ho Xin Ling's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.3
Complex Cases: 1 (33%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	13.0 parties avg	3.0	33%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	33%
Won	18.0 parties avg	8.0	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2012	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2016	18.0 parties avg	8.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Ho Xin Ling's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(33%)	33%
Partial	1(33%)	33%
Won	1(33%)	33%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	35,000.00	11,666.673 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2012	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	UOB v Lippo Marina: Attribution of Fraudulent Employee Knowledge & Summary Determination of Law 21 Feb 2016 United Overseas Bank Limited (Plaintiff, Appellant)Won	21 Feb 2016	United Overseas Bank Limited (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; both applications (determination of law and striking out) granted. Costs of $5,000 awarded to the plaintiff (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Maryani Sadeli v Arjun Permanand Samtani: Equitable Compensation & Breach of Fiduciary Duties in Horizon Towers Collective Sale 19 Nov 2014 Maryani Sadeli (Appellant)Lost	19 Nov 2014	Maryani Sadeli (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs of $30,000 awarded to each respondent (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	Lim Suat Hua v Singapore HealthPartners: Breach of Contract & Fiduciary Duty Dispute 20 Mar 2012 Singapore HealthPartners Pte Ltd (Defendant)Partial	20 Mar 2012	Singapore HealthPartners Pte Ltd (Defendant): Counterclaim allowed in partCounterclaim allowed in part; an account and inquiry before the Registrar as to Lim’s profits from the third contract with Wizvision and payment to Singapore HealthPartners of all sums found to be due and owing on the taking of the account, together with interest at the rate of 5.33% from the date of filing of the Defence and Counterclaim herein (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).