Khoo Boo Jin

Khoo Boo Jin is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2002 to 2025. The lawyer has handled 39 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 5 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in judicial review and estate administration. Their track record shows a 62.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 20 complex cases, representing 51% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated expertise across 140 primary practice areas, with significant experience in administrative law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Administrative Law	20 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 20 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	15 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced59% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 15 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Property Law	14 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 14 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	12 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced74% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 12 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	9 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice39% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 9 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	9 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice29% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 9 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Judicial Review	8 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Estate Administration	7 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	7 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice46% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 7 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Land Law	7 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Constitutional Law	7 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice32% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 7 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	6 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	6 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Costs	6 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced56% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	5 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Company Law	5 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice39% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contempt of Court	4 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Compulsory Acquisition	4 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized81% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wills and Probate	4 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Affidavits	4 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Adverse Possession	4 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized96% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	4 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice14% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Succession Law	4 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Garnishee Proceedings	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced62% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contracts	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Abuse of Process	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice22% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized82% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	3 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice47% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Defamation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice34% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgment	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wrongful arrest	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appeal	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice18% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
False Imprisonment	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Disciplinary Proceedings	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Eminent Domain	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Housing Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Malicious Prosecution	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Scandalising the court	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contempt in the face of the court	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice18% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Revenue Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Limitation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin 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 Practice33% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sham Contract	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Law of Pleadings	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Deeds	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Inherent Power of the Court	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Litigation Privilege	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
State land	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Compulsory Land Acquisition	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Stamp duties	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Tracing	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Wakaf Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Public Interest Privilege	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Official Secrecy	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Land Titles Act	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Taxation of Legal Costs	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Deeds of Release	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Possessory Title	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Qualified Title	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Privatisation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Stakeholders	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Civil Rights	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Communications and Media	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Consumer Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Dispute Resolution	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Internet Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Recognition of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Regulatory Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Syariah	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Trusts and Estates	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Transfer of Cases	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Touting	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Mortgage	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Apparent bias	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Riddick principle	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Issue Estoppel	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Foreign Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Discovery of documents	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Stay of Proceedings	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Breach of Trust	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Strata Titles	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin 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	Experienced50% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Shares	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Vexatious litigants	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Legal fees	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Professional Misconduct	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Charitable trusts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Litigant-in-person	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Intestacy	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Interest in land	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Equity	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Foreign Judgments	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Muslim Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Estate Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Procedural Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Inheritance Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Khoo Boo Jin 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	Khoo Boo Jin 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	Khoo Boo Jin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Khoo Boo Jin has been affiliated with 5 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 20 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	20 cases	51% of cases	Attorney-General v Shanmugam Manohar: Disciplinary Tribunal's Duty to Investigate Touting Charges(Jan 2025) Attorney-General v Shanmugam Manohar: Review of Disciplinary Tribunal's Decision on Touting Allegations(Jan 2024) The Online Citizen Pte Ltd v IMDA: Judicial Review of Broadcasting License Suspension(Dec 2021)
Wee Swee Teow & Co	10 cases	26% of cases	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) Associated Development Pte Ltd v Loong Sie Kiong: Summary Judgment & Limitation Act(Jul 2009)
Wee Swee Teow and Co	7 cases	18% of cases	Fones Christina v Cheong Eng Khoon Roland: Adverse Possession & Land Titles Act(Sep 2005) Lim Lie Hoa v Ong Jane Rebecca: Estate Distribution & Costs Dispute(May 2005) Fones Christina v Cheong Eng Khoon Roland: Adverse Possession Claim on Registered Land(May 2005)
Attorney-General	1 cases	3% of cases	Manjit Singh v Attorney-General: Judicial Review of Disciplinary Tribunal Appointment(Mar 2013)
Tan Suan Boon	1 cases	3% of cases	Ser Kim Koi v William Merrell Fulton: Release of Implied Undertaking under Riddick Principle(Jan 2009)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Khoo Boo Jin's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.7
Complex Cases: 20 (51%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Dismissed	17.0 parties avg	7.0	3%
Lost	93.8 parties avg	3.8	23%
Partial	45.0 parties avg	5.0	10%
Unknown	13.0 parties avg	3.0	3%
Won	243.3 parties avg	3.3	62%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2002	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2003	25.0 parties avg	5.0
2004	34.3 parties avg	4.3
2005	43.0 parties avg	3.0
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2008	34.7 parties avg	4.7
2009	25.5 parties avg	5.5
2011	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2012	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2013	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2014	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2015	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2017	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2018	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2019	34.0 parties avg	4.0
2020	53.3 parties avg	3.3
2021	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2024	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2025	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Khoo Boo Jin's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Dismissed	1(3%)	3%
Lost	9(23%)	23%
Partial	4(10%)	10%
Unknown	1(3%)	3%
Won	24(62%)	62%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	4,722,440.54	295,152.5316 cases	16

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2002	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2003	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2004	3 12	Unknown: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2005	4 22	Lost: 2 cases (50.0%) Won: 2 cases (50.0%)
2006	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	3 111	Lost: 1 cases (33.3%) Partial: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2009	2 11	Dismissed: 1 cases (50.0%) Lost: 1 cases (50.0%)
2011	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2012	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	3 3	Won: 3 cases (100.0%)
2014	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2019	3 12	Partial: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2020	5 14	Partial: 1 cases (20.0%) Won: 4 cases (80.0%)
2021	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2025	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 39 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Attorney-General v Shanmugam Manohar: Disciplinary Tribunal's Duty to Investigate Touting Charges 12 Jan 2025 Attorney-General (Appellant)Won	12 Jan 2025	Attorney-General (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe court allowed the appeal, setting aside the findings of the Second DT on the touting charges and ordering the Law Society to apply for the appointment of another Disciplinary Tribunal to hear and investigate the matter.
2	Attorney-General v Shanmugam Manohar: Review of Disciplinary Tribunal's Decision on Touting Allegations 30 Jan 2024 Attorney-General (Applicant)Lost	30 Jan 2024	Attorney-General (Applicant): Application dismissedThe Attorney-General's application for review was dismissed.
3	The Online Citizen Pte Ltd v IMDA: Judicial Review of Broadcasting License Suspension 15 Dec 2021 Info-communications Media Development Authority (Respondent)Won	15 Dec 2021	Info-communications Media Development Authority (Respondent): WonThe IMDA successfully defended against TOCPL's application for judicial review.
4	Lim Tean v Attorney-General: Judicial Review of Police Investigations 07 Dec 2020 Attorney-General (Defendant)Won	07 Dec 2020	Attorney-General (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment in favour of the Attorney-General; the plaintiff's application was dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Fauziyah v Singapore Land Authority: Striking Out, Appeal, Adducing Fresh Evidence, Compulsory Acquisition, Interest in Land, State Land, Muslim Law, Charitable Trusts 16 Jun 2020 Attorney-General of the Republic of Singapore (Defendant, Respondent)Partial	16 Jun 2020	Attorney-General of the Republic of Singapore (Defendant, Respondent): Appeal allowed in partThe assistant registrar’s decision to strike out the Acquisition Challenge Claim is upheld.
6	Ahmad Kasim v Singapore Land Authority: Judicial Review of Land Acquisition Compensation 03 May 2020 Attorney-General of the Republic of Singapore (Respondent)Won	03 May 2020	Attorney-General of the Republic of Singapore (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentThe application against the Attorney-General of the Republic of Singapore was dismissed.
7	Asia Development Pte Ltd v Attorney-General: Judicial Review of ABSD Remission Decision 23 Mar 2020 The Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	23 Mar 2020	The Attorney-General (Respondent): Appeal DismissedCosts of $50,000 awarded against the appellant (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
8	Ong Wui Teck v Attorney-General: Contempt of Court for Scandalising the Court and Contempt in the Face of the Court 23 Mar 2020 The Attorney-General (Respondent, Applicant)Won	23 Mar 2020	The Attorney-General (Respondent, Applicant): Appeals dismissedThe Attorney-General successfully defended the High Court's decision finding Ong Wui Teck guilty of contempt of court.
9	Fauziyah bte Mohd Ahbidin v Singapore Land Authority: Striking Out Action Regarding Land Acquisition and Title Claim 17 Dec 2019 Attorney-General of the Republic of Singapore (Defendant)Won	17 Dec 2019	Attorney-General of the Republic of Singapore (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe defendant's application to strike out the action was granted.
10	Ahmad Kasim v Moona Esmail: Adverse Possession, Land Acquisition & Compensation 09 Apr 2019 Singapore Land Authority (Respondent)Partial	09 Apr 2019	Singapore Land Authority (Respondent): Appeal allowed in partThe court granted declarations that Mr. Adam adversely acquired title to the House (occupying an area of 405.5m2) in 1967 by virtue of his adverse possession and that all rights and title to the House held by the paper owners were extinguished in 1967.
11	Attorney-General v Ong Wui Teck: Contempt of Court for Scandalising the Court 12 Feb 2019 The Attorney-General (Applicant)Won	12 Feb 2019	The Attorney-General (Applicant): Judgment for ApplicantThe Attorney-General's application for an order of committal was successful.
12	ARW v Comptroller of Income Tax: Public Interest Privilege & Discovery in Tax Avoidance Case 29 Nov 2018 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	29 Nov 2018	Attorney-General (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the Attorney-General's intervention was dismissed.
13	Attorney-General v Ong Wui Teck: Stay of Committal Application Pending Related Appeal 04 Mar 2018 The Attorney-General (Applicant)Won	04 Mar 2018	The Attorney-General (Applicant): Application grantedThe Attorney-General's application was successful in that the respondent's application for a stay was dismissed.
14	Ahmad Kasim v Moona Esmail: Adverse Possession & Land Acquisition Act Dispute 12 Feb 2017 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	12 Feb 2017	Attorney-General (Respondent): WonThe Attorney-General, representing the Government, successfully defended against the applicant's claim.
15	Lai Swee Lin Linda v Attorney-General: Vexatious Litigant Designation 04 Sep 2016 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	04 Sep 2016	Attorney-General (Respondent): Application GrantedApplication to designate Ms. Lai a vexatious litigant granted; costs of $5,000 and disbursements of $2,325 awarded to the Attorney-General (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
16	Per Ah Seng Robin v HDB: HDB Flat Compulsory Acquisition for Unauthorized Subletting 29 Nov 2015 The Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	29 Nov 2015	The Attorney-General (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe HDB's decision to compulsorily acquire the flat was upheld.
17	Per Ah Seng Robin v HDB: Quashing Order Refused for HDB's Compulsory Acquisition of Flat Due to Illegal Subletting 21 Dec 2014 Attorney-General’s Chambers (Respondent)Won	21 Dec 2014	Attorney-General’s Chambers (Respondent): Successful DefenceApplication for leave to file an application for a quashing order was dismissed. Applicants to pay costs of $15,000 to AGC. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
18	Yan Jun v Attorney-General: Appeal Dismissed on False Imprisonment Claim 26 Nov 2014 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	26 Nov 2014	Attorney-General (Respondent): WonAppeal dismissed except for the false imprisonment claim. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
19	Yan Jun v Attorney-General: False Imprisonment, Defamation, and Limitation Act 13 Nov 2013 Attorney-General (Defendant, Respondent)Won	13 Nov 2013	Attorney-General (Defendant, Respondent): Judgment in favor of DefendantAppeal dismissed with costs fixed at $3,000 to the Defendant including disbursements. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
20	Marplan Private Limited v Attorney-General: Judicial Review of High Court Decision 15 Apr 2013 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	15 Apr 2013	Attorney-General (Respondent): Costs AwardedCosts of $500 awarded (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
21	Manjit Singh v Attorney-General: Judicial Review of Disciplinary Tribunal Appointment 14 Mar 2013 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	14 Mar 2013	Attorney-General (Respondent): Costs awardedCosts of $5,000 awarded to the Attorney-General (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
22	Teleoptik-Ziroskopi v Westacre Investments: Garnishee Orders and Beneficial Ownership of Funds 30 Jan 2012 Westacre Investments Inc (Respondent)Partial	30 Jan 2012	Westacre Investments Inc (Respondent): Appeal Dismissed in PartAppeal dismissed to the extent that the garnishee orders absolute were set aside.
23	Westacre Investments Inc v Yugoimport SDPR: Garnishee Proceedings & Beneficial Ownership of Funds 18 May 2011 Westacre Investments Inc (Judgment Creditor)Won	18 May 2011	Westacre Investments Inc (Judgment Creditor): Judgment for Judgment CreditorSummons 5282 allowed; 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.
24	Associated Development Pte Ltd v Loong Sie Kiong: Summary Judgment & Limitation Act 13 Jul 2009 Loong Sie Kiong Gerald (Defendant)Lost	13 Jul 2009	Loong Sie Kiong Gerald (Defendant): Appeal DismissedDefendant's appeal against the dismissal of his application to strike out the plaintiffs’ claims was dismissed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
25	Ser Kim Koi v William Merrell Fulton: Release of Implied Undertaking under Riddick Principle 06 Jan 2009 William Merrell Fulton (Defendant)Dismissed	06 Jan 2009	William Merrell Fulton (Defendant): Application dismissed in partApplication dismissed in respect of the documents that were produced for discovery in the present suit by the first defendant, because these same documents were also disclosed by MFA which ought to have been made a party to this application and have their position heard on whether the implied undertaking should be released.
26	Westacre Investments Inc v Yugoimport SDPR: Enforcement of Commonwealth Judgment 29 Dec 2008 Westacre Investments Inc (Appellant)Won	29 Dec 2008	Westacre Investments Inc (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed with costs here and below as well as the usual consequential orders, and set aside the order made by the Judge. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
27	Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa: Review of Taxation of Costs and Disbursements 24 Mar 2008 Lim Lie Hoa (Defendant)Lost	24 Mar 2008	Lim Lie Hoa (Defendant): Application dismissedDefendant's application for review was dismissed.
28	Ser Kim Koi v Fulton William Merrell: Discovery of Documents & Litigation Privilege 12 Feb 2008 Fulton William Merrell (Defendant)Partial	12 Feb 2008	Fulton William Merrell (Defendant): Appeal allowed in partThe first defendant's appeal against the assistant registrar’s decision was allowed in part.
29	Westacre Investments Inc v Yugoimport-SDPR: Enforcement of Foreign Judgment in Singapore 27 Nov 2006 Westacre Investments Inc (Judgment Creditor)Lost	27 Nov 2006	Westacre Investments Inc (Judgment Creditor): Registration of judgment set asideThe court set aside the registration of the English judgment in Singapore.
30	Fones Christina v Cheong Eng Khoon Roland: Adverse Possession & Land Titles Act 18 Sep 2005 Fones Christina (Appellant)Won	18 Sep 2005	Fones Christina (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; the court declared that the appellant is still the owner of plot A. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the jurisdiction is Singapore.
31	Lim Lie Hoa v Ong Jane Rebecca: Estate Distribution & Costs Dispute 03 May 2005 Lim Lie Hoa (Appellant)Lost	03 May 2005	Lim Lie Hoa (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs to be paid to Jane Ong. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
32	Fones Christina v Cheong Eng Khoon Roland: Adverse Possession Claim on Registered Land 02 May 2005 Fones Christina (Plaintiff)Lost	02 May 2005	Fones Christina (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedThe plaintiff's claim for a declaration that she is entitled to possession of the strip of land in issue was dismissed.
33	Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa: Inquiry into Estate Assets & Breach of Trust 18 Jan 2005 Lim Lie Hoa (Respondent)Won	18 Jan 2005	Lim Lie Hoa (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the respondent was dismissed.
34	Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa: Application to Expunge Documents from Record of Appeal 26 Aug 2004 Lim Lie Hoa (Respondent, Defendant)Won	26 Aug 2004	Lim Lie Hoa (Respondent, Defendant): Application grantedFirst respondent's application to exclude certain documents from the record of appeal was granted; costs of $400 awarded (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
35	Tan and Au v Management Corp: Strata Title Privatization & Legal Fees 22 Aug 2004 Housing and Development Board (Other)	22 Aug 2004	Housing and Development Board (Other): -
36	Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa: Appeal over Estate Valuation and Distribution 15 Jun 2004 Lim Lie Hoa (Defendant)Won	15 Jun 2004	Lim Lie Hoa (Defendant): Appeal dismissedFirst defendant's appeal against the AR’s findings as to the amount distributed to the second defendant was dismissed.
37	Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa: Estate Inquiry Costs & Judgment 29 Jun 2003 Lim Lie Hoa (also known as Lim Le Hoa and Lily Arief Husni) (First Defendant)Lost	29 Jun 2003	Lim Lie Hoa (also known as Lim Le Hoa and Lily Arief Husni) (First Defendant): Judgment against First DefendantFinal judgment for the Plaintiff against the First Defendant for S$2,321,770.27 with interest. Ordered to pay the costs of the inquiry to the Plaintiff, Second Defendant, and Third and Fourth Defendants, with certain exceptions.
38	Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa: Inquiry into Deceased's Estate Distribution 12 Jun 2003 Lim Lie Hoa (also known as Lim Le Hoa and Lily Arief Husni) (Defendant)Lost	12 Jun 2003	Lim Lie Hoa (also known as Lim Le Hoa and Lily Arief Husni) (Defendant): Judgment against DefendantJudgment against Defendant in the amount of $2,321,770.27 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
39	Ong Jane Rebecca v Lim Lie Hoa: Interim Payments, Mareva Injunctions & Third Party Proceedings in Estate Inquiry 26 Sep 2002 Lim Lie Hoa (Defendant, Third Party)Lost	26 Sep 2002	Lim Lie Hoa (Defendant, Third Party): Application to discharge Mareva injunction dismissedApplication to discharge a Mareva injunction imposed by the court was dismissed.