Justin Lai Wen-Jin

Justin Lai Wen-Jin is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2024 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in winding up and undue influence. Their track record shows a 100.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 100% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated expertise across 16 primary practice areas, with significant experience in winding up and undue influence.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Winding Up	2 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	2 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Minority Oppression	2 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Contractual terms	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Abuse of Process	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Duress	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Remedies	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Lifting corporate veil	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Justin Lai Wen-Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Justin Lai Wen-Jin has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Drew & Napier LLC	2 cases	100% of cases	Oon Swee Gek v Violet Oon Inc: Share Valuation & Costs in Oppression Claim(Jul 2024) Oon Swee Gek v Violet Oon Inc: Oppression, Economic Duress & Undue Influence in Shareholders' Agreement Dispute(Jan 2024)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Justin Lai Wen-Jin's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 6.0
Complex Cases: 2 (100%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Won	26.0 parties avg	6.0	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2024	26.0 parties avg	6.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Justin Lai Wen-Jin's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

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

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	897,000.00	448,500.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2024	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Oon Swee Gek v Violet Oon Inc: Share Valuation & Costs in Oppression Claim 02 Jul 2024 Tay Yiming (Claimant)Won	02 Jul 2024	Tay Yiming (Claimant): Costs awardedClaimant awarded costs of $299,000.00 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Oon Swee Gek v Violet Oon Inc: Oppression, Economic Duress & Undue Influence in Shareholders' Agreement Dispute 18 Jan 2024 Tay Yiming (Claimant)Won	18 Jan 2024	Tay Yiming (Claimant): Judgment for ClaimantJudgment for Claimant; the 2019 Agreements were set aside and the defendants were ordered to sell their shares to the claimants at fair value (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).