Khan Nazim

Khan Nazim is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2021 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil procedure and vexatious litigants. Their track record shows a 75.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 50% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Khan Nazim has demonstrated expertise across 21 primary practice areas, with significant experience in civil procedure and civil practice.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Civil Procedure	3 cases	10% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	3 cases	10% of total caseload	Experienced74% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Costs	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Vexatious litigants	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Restraint Order	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khan Nazim 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 Specialized85% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Khan Nazim 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	General Practice20% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Limitation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Negligent misrepresentation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Khan Nazim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Khan Nazim has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
UniLegal LLC	3 cases	75% of cases	Yong Khong Yoong Mark v Ting Choon Meng: Application for Certificate of Three Counsel and Indemnity Costs(Jan 2022) Yong Khong Yoong v Ting Choon Meng: Misrepresentation, Fraud, and Conspiracy in Healthstats Investment(Oct 2021) Symphony Ventures v DNB Bank: Amendment of Claim, Limitation Act & Fraud(Jun 2021)
PDLegal LLC	1 cases	25% of cases	Loke Wei Sue v Paul Jeyasingham Edwards: Extended Civil Restraint Order for Vexatious Litigation(Feb 2024)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Khan Nazim's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.0
Complex Cases: 2 (50%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	25%
Won	34.4 parties avg	4.4	75%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2021	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2022	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2024	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(25%)	25%
Won	3(75%)	75%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	38,000.00	12,666.673 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2021	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2022	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Loke Wei Sue v Paul Jeyasingham Edwards: Extended Civil Restraint Order for Vexatious Litigation 19 Feb 2024 Loke Wei Sue (Applicant)Won	19 Feb 2024	Loke Wei Sue (Applicant): Extended civil restraint order grantedExtended civil restraint order granted against the respondent. The respondent is to pay the applicant costs fixed at $16,000 which includes disbursements for this application. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Yong Khong Yoong Mark v Ting Choon Meng: Application for Certificate of Three Counsel and Indemnity Costs 11 Jan 2022 Chua Ngak Hwee (Defendant)Won	11 Jan 2022	Chua Ngak Hwee (Defendant): Summons dismissedThe defendants' application was dismissed.
3	Yong Khong Yoong v Ting Choon Meng: Misrepresentation, Fraud, and Conspiracy in Healthstats Investment 28 Oct 2021 Chua Ngak Hwee (Defendant)Won	28 Oct 2021	Chua Ngak Hwee (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment for the defendant; costs to be paid by the plaintiffs.
4	Symphony Ventures v DNB Bank: Amendment of Claim, Limitation Act & Fraud 16 Jun 2021 Symphony Ventures Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	16 Jun 2021	Symphony Ventures Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Leave to amend Statement of Claim refused in partPlaintiff ordered to pay costs of S$22,000 to the first defendant. Leave to amend was granted for those amendments that were not found to have run foul of the limitation period and which were not objected to by the defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.