Kelvin Teo

Kelvin Teo is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2007 to 2020. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in fiduciary duties and banking and finance. Their track record shows a 25.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 25% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Kelvin Teo has demonstrated expertise across 42 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and summary judgement.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	8 cases	12% of total caseload	Experienced59% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice32% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice21% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Property Law	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice27% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice42% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	3 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	3 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Lifting corporate veil	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Setting Aside Default Judgement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Liquidation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Tenancy Agreements	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Rules of court	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Insolvency	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Financial Derivatives	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wealth Management	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Private Banking	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Foreign Exchange	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Margin Call	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Partnership Dispute	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Irregular Judgment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Partnership Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kelvin Teo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Kelvin Teo has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
MPillay	4 cases	50% of cases	Lam Chi Kin David v Deutsche Bank AG: Promissory Estoppel & FX Contract Closure(Sep 2012) Lam Chi Kin David v Deutsche Bank AG: Breach of Contract & Promissory Estoppel in FX Trading(Nov 2010) Poh Lian Development v Hok Mee Property: Partnership Dispute, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Corporate Veil Piercing(Aug 2010)
Legal Solutions LLC	3 cases	38% of cases	Mercurine v Canberra: Setting Aside Default Judgment & Delay in Application(Sep 2008) Canberra Development v Mercurine: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Unpaid Rent and Possession(Oct 2007) Canberra Development v Mercurine: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Excessive Sum(Jun 2007)
Drew & Napier LLC	1 cases	13% of cases	CEQ v CER: Stay of Enforcement of Adjudication Determination Pending Appeal and Arbitration(Sep 2020)

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.5
Complex Cases: 2 (25%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	34.6 parties avg	4.6	38%
Partial	32.0 parties avg	2.0	38%
Won	22.0 parties avg	2.0	25%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2007	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2008	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2010	24.3 parties avg	4.3
2012	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2020	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(38%)	38%
Partial	3(38%)	38%
Won	2(25%)	25%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	15,579,184.81	3,115,836.965 cases	5
USD	128,192.09	128,192.091 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2007	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2008	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2012	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	CEQ v CER: Stay of Enforcement of Adjudication Determination Pending Appeal and Arbitration 13 Sep 2020 CER (Respondent)Partial	13 Sep 2020	CER (Respondent): Partial Release of FundsPartial release of S$500,000 of the sums held in court solely for the purpose of legal fees in pursuing the arbitration and the appeal. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Lam Chi Kin David v Deutsche Bank AG: Promissory Estoppel & FX Contract Closure 03 Sep 2012 Lam Chi Kin David (Plaintiff, Appellant)Partial	03 Sep 2012	Lam Chi Kin David (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal allowed in partDamages awarded to the plaintiff in the amount of $128,192.09. The currency was amended from SGD to USD. Pre-judgment interest of 5.33% to commence from 2008-10-13. Assumed USD as the damages were initially recorded as SGD but intended to be in USD.
3	Lam Chi Kin David v Deutsche Bank AG: Breach of Contract & Promissory Estoppel in FX Trading 30 Nov 2010 Lam Chi Kin David (Appellant)Won	30 Nov 2010	Lam Chi Kin David (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe appellant's appeal was allowed with costs. The appellant is entitled to damages, if any, to be assessed by the Registrar on the basis that the respondent was only entitled to close out his FX positions on 13 October 2008 at the earliest.
4	Poh Lian Development v Hok Mee Property: Partnership Dispute, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Corporate Veil Piercing 24 Aug 2010 Kek (Defendant)Lost	24 Aug 2010	Kek (Defendant): Personally liable due to piercing of the corporate veilAs the corporate veil is lifted in respect of Hok Mee and Hok Chung, Kek is personally liable to the partnership for $3,928,672.75 comprising the $1,572,816.72 in (1), $1,955,856.03 in (2) and $400,000 in (3)(b) (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
5	Poh Lian Development v Hok Mee Property: Breach of Fiduciary Duty in Columbarium Development Joint Venture 30 Jun 2009 Kek Kim Hok (Defendant)Lost	30 Jun 2009	Kek Kim Hok (Defendant): Judgment against Defendant in partKek is personally liable for $3,394,400 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Mercurine v Canberra: Setting Aside Default Judgment & Delay in Application 07 Sep 2008 Mercurine Pte Ltd (Appellant)Partial	07 Sep 2008	Mercurine Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal Allowed in PartAppeal varied; Default Judgment deemed set aside if Mercurine succeeds in Consolidated Suit.
7	Canberra Development v Mercurine: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Unpaid Rent and Possession 25 Oct 2007 Mercurine Pte Ltd (Respondent, Defendant)Lost	25 Oct 2007	Mercurine Pte Ltd (Respondent, Defendant): Judgment Set AsideThe Assistant Registrar decided that the whole of the default judgment should be set aside, but this decision was overturned on appeal.
8	Canberra Development v Mercurine: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Excessive Sum 27 Jun 2007 Mercurine Pte Ltd (Defendant)Won	27 Jun 2007	Mercurine Pte Ltd (Defendant): Application to set aside Default Judgment grantedMercurine Pte Ltd's application to set aside the default judgment was granted. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.