Karam Singh Parmar

Karam Singh Parmar is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2002 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 6 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in arbitration and stay of proceedings. Their track record shows a 67.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated expertise across 23 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and arbitration.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	6 cases	17% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 17% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	3 cases	8% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	3 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	3 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Damages	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Causation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration Act	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Liquidated Damages	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Stay of Proceedings	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Interim Certificate	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Construction Contracts	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Remoteness of damage	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Rules of construction	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
UNCITRAL Model Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Delay in completion	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Defective Works	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Karam Singh Parmar has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Karam Singh Parmar has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 6 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Tan Kok Quan Partnership	6 cases	100% of cases	Crescendas Bionics v Jurong Primewide: Building & Construction Delay, Loss of Chance, Damages(Feb 2023) PT Asuransi Jasa Indonesia v Dexia Bank: Setting Aside Arbitral Award & Public Policy(Nov 2006) Jurong Readymix Concrete v Crescendas: Defective Concrete & Premature Formwork Removal Dispute(Apr 2005)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Karam Singh Parmar's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.0
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Partial	22.0 parties avg	2.0	33%
Won	42.0 parties avg	2.0	67%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2002	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2004	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2005	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Karam Singh Parmar's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Partial	2(33%)	33%
Won	4(67%)	67%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	6,877,268.35	1,719,317.094 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2002	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2004	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 6 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Crescendas Bionics v Jurong Primewide: Building & Construction Delay, Loss of Chance, Damages 08 Feb 2023 Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd (Appellant, Plaintiff, Defendant in counterclaim)Partial	08 Feb 2023	Crescendas Bionics Pte Ltd (Appellant, Plaintiff, Defendant in counterclaim): Appeal Allowed in PartAppeal allowed in part, with Jurong Primewide liable for $4,185,802.60 in net rental revenue loss and $1,061,285.86 in Holding Costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	PT Asuransi Jasa Indonesia v Dexia Bank: Setting Aside Arbitral Award & Public Policy 30 Nov 2006 Dexia Bank SA (Respondent)Won	30 Nov 2006	Dexia Bank SA (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal to set aside the arbitral award was dismissed, upholding the award in favor of Dexia Bank SA.
3	Jurong Readymix Concrete v Crescendas: Defective Concrete & Premature Formwork Removal Dispute 06 Apr 2005 Crescendas Pte Ltd (formerly known as Tavica Design Pte Ltd) (Defendant)Partial	06 Apr 2005	Crescendas Pte Ltd (formerly known as Tavica Design Pte Ltd) (Defendant): Interlocutory Judgment for DefendantInterlocutory judgment for the defendant on the counterclaim with damages to be assessed, subject to qualifications. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	MAE Engineering v Fire-Stop: Contract Interpretation & Payment for Cladding Work 22 Nov 2004 MAE Engineering Ltd (Appellant)Won	22 Nov 2004	MAE Engineering Ltd (Appellant): Appeal allowedAppeal allowed with costs. Fire-Stop to refund the judgment sum to MAE and pay MAE the agreed sum of $168,664.29 (excluding GST). Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Mae Engineering v Dragages Singapore: Stay of Proceedings & Arbitration Agreement 24 Apr 2002 MAE Engineering Ltd (Plaintiff, Respondent)Won	24 Apr 2002	MAE Engineering Ltd (Plaintiff, Respondent): Summary judgment grantedSummary judgment granted in favour of Mae Engineering for $1,461,515.60 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Tavica Design v Schindler Lifts: Arbitration of Sub-Contract Dispute over Liquidated Damages 08 Jan 2002 Schindler Lifts (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Respondent, Plaintiff)Won	08 Jan 2002	Schindler Lifts (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Respondent, Plaintiff): Order for arbitration upheldThe court upheld the order to refer the dispute to arbitration.