Kelvin Tan

Kelvin Tan is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2022. The lawyer has handled 33 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 9 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and trademarks. Their track record shows a 31.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 17 complex cases, representing 52% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Kelvin Tan has demonstrated expertise across 120 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and company law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	29 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced51% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 29 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Company Law	13 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 13 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	11 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 11 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	11 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 11 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	10 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced74% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 10 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	7 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced59% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	7 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice28% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 7 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	6 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	6 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	5 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Succession Law	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	4 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice34% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Affidavits	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced56% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Minority Oppression	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized79% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Joint Accounts	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized79% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice47% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wills and Probate	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced74% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Joint Venture	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Performance of Contract	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Confidence	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice32% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Specific performance	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Anti-suit injunction	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Garnishee Proceedings	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estate Administration	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty to Account	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Will Interpretation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Wills	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Interpretation of contractual terms	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Mitigation of damage	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Remoteness of damage	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Variation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Accounting	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Interpretation of Contract	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Foreign Judgments	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Registration of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Franchise Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Solicitor-client relationship	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Discovery Obligations	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Guarantees and indemnities	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Guarantor	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Sham Contract	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Asset Management	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Material non-disclosure	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Insolvency	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Anton Piller Orders	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Patent Infringement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Share Sale Agreement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Mitigation of Damages	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Termination Agreement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Founder's Benefits	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Relief Against Forfeiture	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Administrative Error	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Financial Reporting	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Market Misconduct	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Groundless threat of infringement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Creative accounting	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Litigation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Right of Survivorship	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Loss of Profit	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Registered Design	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Banking Litigation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Contracts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Corporate Governance	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Partnership Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Patents	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Private International Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Securities	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgment	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Inducement of Breach of Contract	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Termination	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Amendment of Pleadings	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Stay of Execution	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Burden of proof	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Director's Duties	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Equity and limitation of actions	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Liquidated Damages	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Issue Estoppel	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Res Judicata	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Discovery	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Statutory Demand	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Remedies	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Setting Aside Default Judgement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Lifting corporate veil	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Mistake	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Offer to Settle	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Fraudulent misrepresentation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Companies Act	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Legal Privilege	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Kelvin Tan has been affiliated with 9 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 11 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Drew & Napier LLC	11 cases	33% of cases	Singapore Airlines v CSDS Aircraft: Breach of Contract, Specific Performance & Termination(Jun 2021) Singapore Airlines v CSDS Aircraft: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Aircraft Purchase Agreement Dispute(Apr 2019) Guy Neale v Nine Squares: Trust, Trade Marks & Ku De Ta Brand Dispute(Dec 2014)
Gabriel Law Corporation	10 cases	30% of cases	Quality Assurance Management Asia v Zhang Qing: Employee's Fiduciary Duty & Equitable Compensation(May 2013) Teleoptik-Ziroskopi v Westacre Investments: Garnishee Orders and Beneficial Ownership of Funds(Jan 2012) Westacre Investments Inc v Yugoimport SDPR: Garnishee Proceedings & Beneficial Ownership of Funds(May 2011)
Drew and Napier LLC	5 cases	15% of cases	Ashlock William Grover v SetClear Pte Ltd: Anti-Suit Injunction & Contract Interpretation(Mar 2012) Rabiah Bee v Salem Ibrahim: Amendment of Claim After Trial, Fiduciary Duty & Joint Venture Dispute(Jan 2006) S & E Tech Pte Ltd v Western Electric Pacific Ltd: Withdrawal of Offer to Settle Due to Unilateral Mistake(Jan 2006)
Lee Bon Leong & Co	2 cases	6% of cases	PT Master Mandiri v Yamazaki Construction: Breach of Contract & Damages for Heavy Machinery(Oct 2000) PT Master Mandiri v Yamazaki Construction: Damages for Breach of Contract & Mitigation of Loss(May 2000)
Mathew Chiong Partnership	1 cases	3% of cases	Tan Wee Fong v Denieru Tatsu: Wrongful Termination & Liquidated Damages in Franchise Agreement(Dec 2009)
KL Tan & Assocs	1 cases	3% of cases	Hunter Manufacturing v Soundtex: Design Infringement, Remedies, and Costs(Jan 2000)
Vicki Heng Law Corporation	1 cases	3% of cases	Viking Engineering v Feen: Minority Oppression & Breach of Contract in Joint Venture(Jun 2022)
M/s Drew & Napier LLC	1 cases	3% of cases	VBH Singapore Pte Ltd v Technobuilt Construction: Striking Out Claim for Lack of Reasonable Cause of Action(May 2013)
Drew & Napier	1 cases	3% of cases	Lum Kai Heng v Quek Peng Chai: Dispute Over Joint Bank Account Ownership After Death(Mar 2001)

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.9
Complex Cases: 17 (52%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	164.5 parties avg	4.5	48%
Neutral	35.3 parties avg	5.3	9%
Partial	53.5 parties avg	3.5	15%
Won	115.8 parties avg	5.8	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2001	37.6 parties avg	7.6
2002	17.0 parties avg	7.0
2004	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2005	18.0 parties avg	8.0
2006	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2007	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2008	43.4 parties avg	3.4
2009	44.7 parties avg	4.7
2011	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2012	26.0 parties avg	6.0
2013	34.4 parties avg	4.4
2014	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2019	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2021	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2022	16.0 parties avg	6.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	16(46%)	46%
Neutral	3(9%)	9%
Partial	5(14%)	14%
Won	11(31%)	31%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	3,768,235.69	188,411.7820 cases	20

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	3 21	Partial: 2 cases (66.7%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2001	3 3	Won: 3 cases (100.0%)
2002	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2004	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2005	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	3 3	Lost: 3 cases (100.0%)
2007	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)
2008	4 31	Lost: 3 cases (75.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2009	4 1111	Lost: 1 cases (25.0%) Neutral: 1 cases (25.0%) Partial: 1 cases (25.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2011	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2012	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)
2013	3 12	Lost: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2014	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2021	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 33 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Viking Engineering v Feen: Minority Oppression & Breach of Contract in Joint Venture 28 Jun 2022 Feen Marine Scrubbers Pte Ltd (Defendant)Neutral	28 Jun 2022	Feen Marine Scrubbers Pte Ltd (Defendant): NeutralFeen Marine Scrubbers Pte Ltd is a defendant in the case. The outcome for this party is neutral.
2	Singapore Airlines v CSDS Aircraft: Breach of Contract, Specific Performance & Termination 13 Jun 2021 Singapore Airlines Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant in counterclaim)Won	13 Jun 2021	Singapore Airlines Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant in counterclaim): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; damages to be assessed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	Singapore Airlines v CSDS Aircraft: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Aircraft Purchase Agreement Dispute 29 Apr 2019 Singapore Airlines Limited (Plaintiff)Lost	29 Apr 2019	Singapore Airlines Limited (Plaintiff): Application to set aside default judgment allowedThe defendant's application to set aside the default judgment was allowed.
4	Guy Neale v Nine Squares: Trust, Trade Marks & Ku De Ta Brand Dispute 21 Dec 2014 Nine Squares Pty Ltd (Respondent)Lost	21 Dec 2014	Nine Squares Pty Ltd (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; Singapore Marks held on trust for the Partnership.
5	Neale v Nine Squares: Trust, Trade Marks & Partnership Dispute over 'KU DE TA' Brand 17 Nov 2013 Nine Squares Pty Ltd (Defendant)Won	17 Nov 2013	Nine Squares Pty Ltd (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment for the Defendant; no monetary award. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	VBH Singapore Pte Ltd v Technobuilt Construction: Striking Out Claim for Lack of Reasonable Cause of Action 06 May 2013 Second defendant (Defendant)Won	06 May 2013	Second defendant (Defendant): Application to strike out claim allowedThe second defendant's application to be struck out of the Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim was allowed. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Quality Assurance Management Asia v Zhang Qing: Employee's Fiduciary Duty & Equitable Compensation 02 May 2013 Pinnacle Microelectronic Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	02 May 2013	Pinnacle Microelectronic Pte Ltd (Defendant): Judgment against DefendantJudgment against Defendant in the amount of $70,562.10 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
8	Ashlock William Grover v SetClear Pte Ltd: Anti-Suit Injunction & Contract Interpretation 18 Mar 2012 Ashlock William Grover (Appellant)Lost	18 Mar 2012	Ashlock William Grover (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs.
9	Teleoptik-Ziroskopi v Westacre Investments: Garnishee Orders and Beneficial Ownership of Funds 30 Jan 2012 Deuteron (Asia) Pte Ltd (Appellant)Partial	30 Jan 2012	Deuteron (Asia) Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal Allowed in PartAppeal allowed to the extent that the garnishee orders absolute were set aside.
10	SetClear Pte Ltd v Ashlock William Grover: Enforceability of Termination Agreement and Anti-Suit Injunction 23 May 2011 Ashlock William Grover (Defendant)Lost	23 May 2011	Ashlock William Grover (Defendant): Declarations and anti-suit injunction granted against DefendantDeclarations sought by the plaintiffs granted, and anti-suit injunction issued against the defendant. Defendant ordered to pay costs of $15,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
11	Westacre Investments Inc v Yugoimport SDPR: Garnishee Proceedings & Beneficial Ownership of Funds 18 May 2011 The State-Owned Company Yugoimport SDPR (Judgment Debtor, Garnishee)Lost	18 May 2011	The State-Owned Company Yugoimport SDPR (Judgment Debtor, Garnishee): Judgment against Judgment DebtorSummons 5377 dismissed; provisional garnishee orders made final; Judgment Debtor to pay costs of the garnishee proceedings to the Judgment Creditor. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
12	Tan Wee Fong v Denieru Tatsu: Wrongful Termination & Liquidated Damages in Franchise Agreement 30 Dec 2009 Denieru Tatsu F&B Holdings (S) Pte Ltd (Defendant)Neutral	30 Dec 2009	Denieru Tatsu F&B Holdings (S) Pte Ltd (Defendant): Counterclaim DismissedThe defendant's counterclaim for liquidated damages was dismissed.
13	ADG v ADH: Construction of Will, Lapse of Residuary Gift, Intestate Succession Act 27 Sep 2009 ADG (executor and trustee of the estate of B (alias C), deceased) (Plaintiff)Won	27 Sep 2009	ADG (executor and trustee of the estate of B (alias C), deceased) (Plaintiff): Judgment in favor of PlaintiffThe court declared that the lapsed gift falls into the residuary estate and is divisible into thirds among the surviving sons. The applicant’s costs of the proceedings are to be paid out of the estate. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
14	Vijayalakshmi v Mrinalini: Oppression Claim Under Companies Act 12 Aug 2009 Sheldon Investments Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent)Lost	12 Aug 2009	Sheldon Investments Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent): Costs awarded to the defendantsCosts awarded to the defendants for both the appeal application and the appeal, to be borne by the plaintiff's solicitor personally. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
15	Tan Keaw Chong v Chua Tiong Guan: Estate Representation & Breach of Oral Agreement 25 May 2009 Tan Keaw Chong (Plaintiff)Partial	25 May 2009	Tan Keaw Chong (Plaintiff): Application to substitute party grantedPlaintiff's application to substitute the Second Defendant as representative of the estate was granted.
16	TCL Industries v ICC Chemical: Discovery of Documents and Counsel's Duty to Court 18 Dec 2008 ICC Chemical Corp (Defendant, Respondent)Won	18 Dec 2008	ICC Chemical Corp (Defendant, Respondent): Order for further discovery upheldOrder for further discovery upheld; costs awarded to the defendant (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
17	Tentat Singapore v Multiple Granite: Legal Advice Privilege & Waiver in Loan Dispute 19 Aug 2008 Tan Hong Huat (Defendant)Lost	19 Aug 2008	Tan Hong Huat (Defendant): Application DeniedThe defendants are not allowed to tender the email or secondary evidence of it in the suit and ordered to pay costs to the plaintiff. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
18	Sunny Daisy Ltd v WBG Network: Amendment of Writ and Setting Aside Judgment 14 Jul 2008 WBG Network (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	14 Jul 2008	WBG Network (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant): Application to set aside judgment dismissedThe court dismissed the defendant's application to set aside the judgment previously granted in favor of the plaintiff.
19	Bing Integrated Construction v Eco Special Waste Management: Discovery of Documents in Construction Contract Dispute 21 Feb 2008 Eco Special Waste Management Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	21 Feb 2008	Eco Special Waste Management Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal dismissedAppeal dismissed; ordered to pay costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
20	TCL Industries v ICC Chemical: Discovery Dispute in Breach of Contract Claim 04 Dec 2007 ICC Chemical Corp (Defendant, Respondent)Lost	04 Dec 2007	ICC Chemical Corp (Defendant, Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; ordered to pay costs of $3,500 together with reasonable disbursements (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
21	Rabiah Bee v Salem Ibrahim: Fiduciary Duties, Partnership, Joint Ventures & Solicitor-Client Relationship in Property Investment 22 Feb 2007 Salem Ibrahim (Defendant)Partial	22 Feb 2007	Salem Ibrahim (Defendant): Counterclaim Allowed in PartThe defendant's counterclaim was allowed in part. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
22	Rabiah Bee v Salem Ibrahim: Amendment of Claim After Trial, Fiduciary Duty & Joint Venture Dispute 26 Jan 2006 Salem Ibrahim (Defendant)Lost	26 Jan 2006	Salem Ibrahim (Defendant): Amendment allowedThe court allowed the plaintiff to amend the Statement of Claim, against the defendant's objections.
23	S & E Tech Pte Ltd v Western Electric Pacific Ltd: Withdrawal of Offer to Settle Due to Unilateral Mistake 19 Jan 2006 S & E Tech Pte Ltd (Appellant)Lost	19 Jan 2006	S & E Tech Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal dismissedAppeal against the decision to allow the withdrawal of the offer to settle was dismissed.
24	Asian Corporate Services v Eastwest Management: Anton Piller Order & Conspiracy 15 Jan 2006 Eastwest Management Ltd (Singapore Branch) (Respondent)Lost	15 Jan 2006	Eastwest Management Ltd (Singapore Branch) (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; the respondent shall pay the costs here and below, with the usual consequential orders. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
25	Asian Corporate Services v Impact Pacific: Setting Aside Anton Piller Order 03 Aug 2005 Eastwest Management Ltd (Singapore Branch) (Defendant)Won	03 Aug 2005	Eastwest Management Ltd (Singapore Branch) (Defendant): Order against the third defendant set asideThe court set aside the Anton Piller order against Eastwest Management Ltd (Singapore Branch). Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
26	Vita Health v Pang: Director's Duties, Fictitious Sales, Breach of Contract & Misrepresentation 28 Jul 2004 Vita Life Sciences Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	28 Jul 2004	Vita Life Sciences Ltd (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $2,368,821.99 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
27	Contour Optik v Pearl's Optical: Patent Infringement, Spectacle Frames, Magnetic Clip-ons 13 Oct 2002 Chao Richard Hao-Chih (Plaintiff)Lost	13 Oct 2002	Chao Richard Hao-Chih (Plaintiff): Claims DismissedThe Plaintiffs’ claims against all four Defendants in both Suits are dismissed.
28	Lum Kai Keng v Quek Peng Chai: Survivorship Rights in Joint Accounts & Testator's Intent 04 Oct 2001 Quek Mei Kuen Joey (Defendant)Won	04 Oct 2001	Quek Mei Kuen Joey (Defendant): Application DismissedThe plaintiff's application under O 14 r 12 was dismissed.
29	Lum Kai Keng v Quek Peng Chai: Summary Judgment & Determination of Rights to Joint Account Funds 04 Oct 2001 Others (Defendant)Won	04 Oct 2001	Others (Defendant): Application DismissedThe application against the defendant was dismissed.
30	Lum Kai Heng v Quek Peng Chai: Dispute Over Joint Bank Account Ownership After Death 26 Mar 2001 Saranya Sae-Ngow (Defendant, Respondent)Won	26 Mar 2001	Saranya Sae-Ngow (Defendant, Respondent): Appeal dismissedAppeal against the decision to dismiss the Plaintiff's application to amend the Statement of Claim was dismissed.
31	PT Master Mandiri v Yamazaki Construction: Breach of Contract & Damages for Heavy Machinery 24 Oct 2000 PT Master Mandiri (Plaintiff)Partial	24 Oct 2000	PT Master Mandiri (Plaintiff): Damages AwardedDamages of $183,150 awarded with interest. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
32	PT Master Mandiri v Yamazaki Construction: Damages for Breach of Contract & Mitigation of Loss 05 May 2000 PT Master Mandiri (Plaintiff)Partial	05 May 2000	PT Master Mandiri (Plaintiff): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part; case remitted to registrar to assess damages for non-delivery of six machines. Currency assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
33	Hunter Manufacturing v Soundtex: Design Infringement, Remedies, and Costs 11 Jan 2000 Hunter Manufacturing Pte Ltd (Appellant, Respondent)Won	11 Jan 2000	Hunter Manufacturing Pte Ltd (Appellant, Respondent): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; inquiry into damages ordered for infringement after 12 June 1997; Soundtex to pay costs of claim, counterclaim, and appeals (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).