Jordan Tan Zhengxian

Jordan Tan Zhengxian is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2020 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in contract law and misrepresentation. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 50% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated expertise across 16 primary practice areas, with significant experience in civil procedure and contract law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Civil Procedure	2 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Pleadings	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Stay of Proceedings	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Choice of Law	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Rescission	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Fraudulent misrepresentation	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Guarantee	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Jordan Tan Zhengxian has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Jordan Tan Zhengxian has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 1 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Cavenagh Law LLP	1 cases	50% of cases	Liberty Sky Investments v Aesthetic Medical Partners: Fraudulent Misrepresentation & Contract Rescission(Feb 2020)
Audent Chambers LLC	1 cases	50% of cases	Horizon Capital Fund v Ollech David: Stay of Proceedings & Summary Judgment(Jun 2023)

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.0
Complex Cases: 1 (50%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	23.0 parties avg	3.0	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2020	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2023	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(100%)	100%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2020	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Horizon Capital Fund v Ollech David: Stay of Proceedings & Summary Judgment 07 Jun 2023 Ollech David (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	07 Jun 2023	Ollech David (Defendant, Appellant): Application and appeals dismissedThe defendant's application for a stay of proceedings and appeals against the summary judgement were dismissed. No specific monetary amount was involved in this judgment. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Liberty Sky Investments v Aesthetic Medical Partners: Fraudulent Misrepresentation & Contract Rescission 09 Feb 2020 Liberty Sky Investments Limited (Appellant, Plaintiff, Applicant, Respondent)Lost	09 Feb 2020	Liberty Sky Investments Limited (Appellant, Plaintiff, Applicant, Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed. No monetary amount awarded. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.