James Lin

James Lin is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2010 to 2015. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in property law and conspiracy by unlawful means. Their track record shows a 67.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

James Lin has demonstrated expertise across 24 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	2 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Mareva Injunctions	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Trade Finance	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Anti-suit injunction	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Contempt of Court	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Abuse of Process	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Revenue Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Income taxation	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Sale of Land	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Defamation	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Succession Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Adverse Possession	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Partition	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Asset Protection	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	James Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

James Lin has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Harry Elias Partnership LLP	3 cases	100% of cases	Tan Bee Hoon v Quek Hung Heong: Sale of Property, Proprietary Estoppel & Abuse of Process(Aug 2015) Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs v Hashu Dhalomal Shahdadpuri: Conspiracy & MTIC Fraud(Jun 2011) ANB v ANF: Defamation, O 14 r 12, Meaning of Defamatory Words, Justification Defence(Nov 2010)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of James Lin'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%
Won	24.7 parties avg	4.7	67%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2015	16.0 parties avg	6.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

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

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2010	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Tan Bee Hoon v Quek Hung Heong: Sale of Property, Proprietary Estoppel & Abuse of Process 30 Aug 2015 Tan Bee Hoon (executrix for the estate of Heng Sai Kee, deceased) (Plaintiff)Won	30 Aug 2015	Tan Bee Hoon (executrix for the estate of Heng Sai Kee, deceased) (Plaintiff): Application for sale in lieu of partition grantedPlaintiffs' application for sale in lieu of partition granted.
2	Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs v Hashu Dhalomal Shahdadpuri: Conspiracy & MTIC Fraud 28 Jun 2011 Hashu Dhalomal Shahdadpuri (Respondent)Lost	28 Jun 2011	Hashu Dhalomal Shahdadpuri (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the respondent was allowed.
3	ANB v ANF: Defamation, O 14 r 12, Meaning of Defamatory Words, Justification Defence 02 Nov 2010 ANF (Defendant)Won	02 Nov 2010	ANF (Defendant): Appeal allowedThe defendant’s appeal against the Assistant Registrar’s determination on meaning of the Article was allowed.