Jamal Siddique Peer

Jamal Siddique Peer is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2018 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 9 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in insolvency law and civil practice. Their track record shows a 44.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 3 complex cases, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated expertise across 29 primary practice areas, with significant experience in civil procedure and administrative law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Civil Procedure	4 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice44% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	4 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	4 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced69% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Costs	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced74% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	3 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Mental Capacity Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Legal Malpractice	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Judicial Review	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conflict of Laws	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Bill of costs	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Taxation of Legal Costs	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Forum Non Conveniens	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
International Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer 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	General Practice30% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Dissolution	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jamal Siddique Peer has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Jamal Siddique Peer has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 9 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Shook Lin & Bok LLP	9 cases	100% of cases	Lim Oon Kuin v Official Assignee: Appointment of Private Trustees in Bankruptcy Dispute(Dec 2024) Majestica Enterprises v Kams Singapore: Creditor Funding in Winding Up under IRDA(Sep 2023) CBB v Law Society: Mandatory Order for Legal Profession Act Complaint(Jan 2021)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Jamal Siddique Peer's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.9
Complex Cases: 3 (33%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	34.4 parties avg	4.4	33%
Neutral	110.0 parties avg	10.0	11%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	11%
Won	42.3 parties avg	2.3	44%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2018	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2020	43.2 parties avg	3.2
2021	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2024	110.0 parties avg	10.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Jamal Siddique Peer's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(33%)	33%
Neutral	1(11%)	11%
Partial	1(11%)	11%
Won	4(44%)	44%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	34,000.00	8,500.004 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2018	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2020	4 22	Lost: 2 cases (50.0%) Won: 2 cases (50.0%)
2021	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 9 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Lim Oon Kuin v Official Assignee: Appointment of Private Trustees in Bankruptcy Dispute 29 Dec 2024 The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (Non-party)Neutral	29 Dec 2024	The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (Non-party): NeutralThe Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited was a non-party in the proceedings.
2	Majestica Enterprises v Kams Singapore: Creditor Funding in Winding Up under IRDA 06 Sep 2023 The Challenger Trade Finance Segregated Portfolio of the South Africa Alpha SPC (Applicant)Won	06 Sep 2023	The Challenger Trade Finance Segregated Portfolio of the South Africa Alpha SPC (Applicant): Application grantedThe application for an order pursuant to s 204(3) of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 was granted.
3	CBB v Law Society: Mandatory Order for Legal Profession Act Complaint 28 Jan 2021 CBB (Appellant, Applicant)Partial	28 Jan 2021	CBB (Appellant, Applicant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part; mandatory order granted. Costs of the appeal awarded to the appellant, fixed at $10,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Koh Kim Teck v Shook Lin & Bok LLP: Setting Aside Statutory Demand & Validity of Service 09 Dec 2020 Shook Lin & Bok LLP (Respondent)Won	09 Dec 2020	Shook Lin & Bok LLP (Respondent): Appeal UpheldAppeal upheld; costs of $24,000 (including disbursements) to be paid by the appellant to the respondent. The usual consequential orders are to apply. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Bunge SA v Shrikant Bhasi: Jurisdiction, Forum Non Conveniens & Contractual Interpretation 29 Sep 2020 Advantage Overseas Private Limited (Respondent, Defendant, Appellant)Lost	29 Sep 2020	Advantage Overseas Private Limited (Respondent, Defendant, Appellant): Claims to be heard in SingaporeClaims against AOPL are ordered to be heard in Singapore (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	CBB v Law Society of Singapore: Costs Order in Judicial Review of Regulatory Function 18 Mar 2020 CBB (Applicant)Lost	18 Mar 2020	CBB (Applicant): Costs not awardedThe Applicant's request for costs was denied.
7	CBB v Law Society of Singapore: Judicial Review of Law Society's Decision on Lawyer Misconduct Complaint 02 Jan 2020 CBB (Applicant)Won	02 Jan 2020	CBB (Applicant): Application AllowedJudicial review allowed; the decision of the Council not to apply for leave to refer the pre 17 April 2012 events to the Chairman is quashed, and a mandatory order is granted directing the Council to reconsider its decision.
8	Ermgassen & Co Ltd v Sixcap Financials Pte Ltd: Enforcement of UK Judgment under Choice of Court Agreements Act 18 Jun 2018 Ermgassen & Co Limited (Plaintiff)Won	18 Jun 2018	Ermgassen & Co Limited (Plaintiff): Enforcement Application grantedThe court granted the plaintiff's application to enforce the summary judgment.
9	BLG v BLI: Review of Bill of Costs in Mental Capacity Act Application 11 Apr 2018 BLH (Applicant)Lost	11 Apr 2018	BLH (Applicant): Summons dismissedThe applicants' summons for the first and second respondents to produce documents setting out a breakdown of the total number of hours spent by each of their lawyers was dismissed.