Kenneth Yap

Kenneth Yap is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2009 to 2019. The lawyer has handled 5 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 4 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal procedure and criminal law. Their track record shows a 17.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 40% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Kenneth Yap has demonstrated expertise across 31 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and company law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	3 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice37% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced66% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Landlord and Tenant Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Legal Malpractice	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Offences	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Kenneth Yap 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 Practice40% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Criminal conspiracy	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Crossclaims	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Mortgage Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Investment	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Relationship Manager	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Kenneth Yap has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Kenneth Yap has been affiliated with 4 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	2 cases	40% of cases	Public Prosecutor v Phuthita Somchit: Trafficking Diamorphine Conspiracy Case(Mar 2011) Bachoo Mohan Singh v PP: False Claim, Solicitor's Duty, and Penal Code Interpretation(Dec 2009)
Withers KhattarWong LLP	1 cases	20% of cases	JTrust Asia v Group Lease: Striking Out Application for Conspiracy to Defraud(Jan 2019)
Niru & Co LLC	1 cases	20% of cases	Mukherjee v. Biswas: Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Tort of Deceit, Investments, Banking Relationship Manager(Dec 2018)
KhattarWong LLP	1 cases	20% of cases	United Overseas Bank v Homely Bath Services: Mortgagee's Rights vs. Tenant's Rights in Property Possession(Jan 2019)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Kenneth Yap's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 5.4
Complex Cases: 2 (40%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Dismissed	14.0 parties avg	4.0	20%
Lost	14.0 parties avg	4.0	20%
Neutral	18.0 parties avg	8.0	20%
Partial	23.0 parties avg	3.0	40%
Won	13.0 parties avg	3.0	20%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2009	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2011	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2018	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2019	27.0 parties avg	7.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Dismissed	1(17%)	17%
Lost	1(17%)	17%
Neutral	1(17%)	17%
Partial	2(33%)	33%
Won	1(17%)	17%

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2009	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	2 11	Dismissed: 1 cases (50.0%) Lost: 1 cases (50.0%)
2019	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 5 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	JTrust Asia v Group Lease: Striking Out Application for Conspiracy to Defraud 31 Jan 2019 Baguera Limited (Defendant)Neutral	31 Jan 2019	Baguera Limited (Defendant): No specific outcomeNo specific outcome for this party is mentioned in the judgment extract.
2	United Overseas Bank v Homely Bath Services: Mortgagee's Rights vs. Tenant's Rights in Property Possession 23 Jan 2019 United Overseas Bank Limited (Plaintiff)Won	23 Jan 2019	United Overseas Bank Limited (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; the court ruled in favor of UOB, finding that UOB was not bound by the third tenancy agreement and was entitled to possession of the property (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	Mukherjee v. Biswas: Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Tort of Deceit, Investments, Banking Relationship Manager 10 Dec 2018 Indian Ocean Group Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Dismissed	10 Dec 2018	Indian Ocean Group Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedClaim dismissed. (Currency assumed to be SGD, the currency of Singapore, as the judgment originates from Singapore.)
4	Public Prosecutor v Phuthita Somchit: Trafficking Diamorphine Conspiracy Case 24 Mar 2011 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Partial	24 Mar 2011	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): PartialConviction of Quek Hock Lye, but Somchit acquitted of the main charge.
5	Bachoo Mohan Singh v PP: False Claim, Solicitor's Duty, and Penal Code Interpretation 03 Dec 2009 Public Prosecutor (Respondent, Applicant)Partial	03 Dec 2009	Public Prosecutor (Respondent, Applicant): Extension of time granted to apply to the High Court Judge for leave to raise questions to the Court of AppealExtension of time granted to apply to the High Court Judge for leave to raise questions to the Court of Appeal.