Jensen Chow

Jensen Chow is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2011 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in arbitration and judicial management. Their track record shows a 100.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 25% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Jensen Chow has demonstrated expertise across 21 primary practice areas, with significant experience in arbitration and banking and finance.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Arbitration	3 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Judicial Management	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Receivership	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Arbitration	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Natural justice	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Burden of proof	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Waiver	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Functus Officio	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Setting Aside Arbitral Award	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Duty to Account	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Interpretation of contractual terms	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jensen Chow has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Jensen Chow has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Rajah & Tann LLP	3 cases	75% of cases	Kempinski Hotels SA v PT Prima: Setting Aside Arbitration Awards for Wrongful Termination(Jul 2011) Kempinski Hotels SA v PT Prima International Development: Setting Aside of Arbitration Award(Jul 2011) Kempinski Hotels SA v PT Prima International Development: Setting Aside Arbitration Award(Jul 2011)
Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP	1 cases	25% of cases	Yap Sze Kam v Yang Kee Logistics: Judicial Management vs. Bondholder Rights(Feb 2023)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Jensen Chow's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 5.5
Complex Cases: 1 (25%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Won	45.5 parties avg	5.5	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2011	32.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	116.0 parties avg	16.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Won	4(100%)	100%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2011	3 3	Won: 3 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Yap Sze Kam v Yang Kee Logistics: Judicial Management vs. Bondholder Rights 23 Feb 2023 United Orient Capital Pte Ltd (Other)Won	23 Feb 2023	United Orient Capital Pte Ltd (Other): Application DismissedOpposed the JM Applications.
2	Kempinski Hotels SA v PT Prima: Setting Aside Arbitration Awards for Wrongful Termination 18 Jul 2011 Kempinski Hotels SA (Applicant)Won	18 Jul 2011	Kempinski Hotels SA (Applicant): Application allowed with costsApplication to set aside the Third Award, Fourth Award and Costs Award was allowed with costs. Assumed SGD as the jurisdiction is Singapore.
3	Kempinski Hotels SA v PT Prima International Development: Setting Aside of Arbitration Award 18 Jul 2011 Kempinski Hotels SA (Applicant, Claimant)Won	18 Jul 2011	Kempinski Hotels SA (Applicant, Claimant): Application AllowedApplication to set aside the arbitration award was allowed with costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Kempinski Hotels SA v PT Prima International Development: Setting Aside Arbitration Award 18 Jul 2011 Kempinski Hotels SA (Applicant, Claimant)Won	18 Jul 2011	Kempinski Hotels SA (Applicant, Claimant): Application AllowedApplication to set aside the costs award was allowed with costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).