Jonathan Tan

Jonathan Tan is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2008 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 10 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 7 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and sentencing. Their track record shows a 70.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Jonathan Tan has demonstrated expertise across 42 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and breach of contract.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	5 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Property Law	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Admiralty and Maritime Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Statutory offences	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Inducement of Breach of Contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Recourse against award	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Natural justice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Anti-suit injunction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Prevention of Corruption Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Setting aside	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Shipping Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Road Traffic Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Deeds of Settlement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Forum conveniens	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Shareholders Agreement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Jonathan Tan 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 Practice20% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
International Comity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mortgage Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Consent Order	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Video Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Relief Against Forfeiture	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Landlord and Tenant Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mortgages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Obstruction of Justice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized98% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Sex Crimes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Jonathan Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Jonathan Tan has been affiliated with 7 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Withers KhattarWong LLP	2 cases	20% of cases	CIX v CIY: Setting Aside Partial Arbitration Award for Breach of Natural Justice and Exceeding Scope of Submission(Mar 2021) Anil Singh Gurm v J S Yeh & Co: Video Link Evidence and Witness Attendance in Negligence Claim(Feb 2020)
Attorney-General’s Chambers	2 cases	20% of cases	Public Prosecutor v CHJ: Sexual Assault & Obstruction of Justice(Sep 2024) Public Prosecutor v Rizuwan bin Rohmat: Road Traffic Act Offences and Sentencing(Mar 2023)
Allen & Gledhill LLP	2 cases	20% of cases	Ng Hock Kon v Sembawang Capital: Mortgage Enforcement, Notice of Default & Relief from Forfeiture(Oct 2009) Sembawang Capital v Ng Hock Kon: Mortgagee's Right to Possession and Relief Against Forfeiture(Oct 2008)
Mok & Tan	1 cases	10% of cases	Andiappan Vijayakumar v Chartered World Academy: Injunction Dispute over Tenancy Agreement(Feb 2010)
Attorney-General’s Chambers (Criminal Justice Division)	1 cases	10% of cases	Chang Peng Hong Clarence v Public Prosecutor: Multiple Penalties Under Prevention of Corruption Act(Dec 2024)
Rajah & Tann LLP	1 cases	10% of cases	Hai Jiang v. Singapore Technologies Marine: Anti-Suit Injunction & Arbitration of Crane Upgrade Dispute(Jan 2020)
Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP	1 cases	10% of cases	Big Port Service DMCC v Owner of Vessel “XIN CHANG SHU”: Leave to Appeal Wrongful Arrest Order(May 2016)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Jonathan Tan's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.1
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	22.0 parties avg	2.0	20%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	10%
Won	72.1 parties avg	2.1	70%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2008	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2020	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2021	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2024	22.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(20%)	20%
Partial	1(10%)	10%
Won	7(70%)	70%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	34,000.00	11,333.333 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2008	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2021	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 10 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Chang Peng Hong Clarence v Public Prosecutor: Multiple Penalties Under Prevention of Corruption Act 03 Dec 2024 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Partial	03 Dec 2024	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal Allowed in PartThe appeal was allowed in part, with the court recalibrating the in-default imprisonment term upwards.
2	Public Prosecutor v CHJ: Sexual Assault & Obstruction of Justice 16 Sep 2024 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	16 Sep 2024	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Accused convicted of all chargesThe Prosecution successfully proved all charges against the Accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
3	Public Prosecutor v Rizuwan bin Rohmat: Road Traffic Act Offences and Sentencing 16 Mar 2023 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	16 Mar 2023	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe Prosecution's appeal against the sentence was allowed, and the respondent was sentenced to five weeks' imprisonment.
4	CIX v CIY: Setting Aside Partial Arbitration Award for Breach of Natural Justice and Exceeding Scope of Submission 04 Mar 2021 CIX (Plaintiff)Lost	04 Mar 2021	CIX (Plaintiff): Application dismissedApplication to set aside certain findings in a partial arbitration award was dismissed. Legal costs of $24,000 plus disbursements of $4,696.60 awarded to the defendant (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
5	Anil Singh Gurm v J S Yeh & Co: Video Link Evidence and Witness Attendance in Negligence Claim 06 Feb 2020 Anil Singh Gurm (Appellant)Won	06 Feb 2020	Anil Singh Gurm (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe appeal was allowed, granting the appellant leave to adduce Mr Sekhon’s testimony in Suit 580 via video link.
6	Hai Jiang v. Singapore Technologies Marine: Anti-Suit Injunction & Arbitration of Crane Upgrade Dispute 23 Jan 2020 Hai Jiang 1401 Pte. Ltd. (Plaintiff)Won	23 Jan 2020	Hai Jiang 1401 Pte. Ltd. (Plaintiff): Anti-Suit Injunction GrantedThe court granted an anti-suit injunction restraining Singapore Technologies Marine Ltd from maintaining the arrest of the vessel through the Sharjah Proceedings.
7	Big Port Service DMCC v Owner of Vessel “XIN CHANG SHU”: Leave to Appeal Wrongful Arrest Order 17 May 2016 Owner of the vessel “XIN CHANG SHU” (Defendant)Won	17 May 2016	Owner of the vessel “XIN CHANG SHU” (Defendant): WonThe defendant's application to set aside the NOA was successful. The plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant’s costs which was fixed at $10,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Andiappan Vijayakumar v Chartered World Academy: Injunction Dispute over Tenancy Agreement 09 Feb 2010 Chartered World Academy Pte Ltd (Defendant)Won	09 Feb 2010	Chartered World Academy Pte Ltd (Defendant): Consent Order to standThe court ordered that the Consent Order made on 24 December 2009 was to stand.
9	Ng Hock Kon v Sembawang Capital: Mortgage Enforcement, Notice of Default & Relief from Forfeiture 19 Oct 2009 Sembawang Capital Pte Ltd (Respondent)Lost	19 Oct 2009	Sembawang Capital Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed because the Notice of Default was not properly served, and the Deed was not properly terminated.
10	Sembawang Capital v Ng Hock Kon: Mortgagee's Right to Possession and Relief Against Forfeiture 22 Oct 2008 Sembawang Capital Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	22 Oct 2008	Sembawang Capital Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffPlaintiff's application allowed; defendant ordered to deliver vacant possession and pay outstanding debt (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).