Lawrence Teh

Lawrence Teh is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2020. The lawyer has handled 29 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 4 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and admiralty and maritime law. Their track record shows a 31.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 11 complex cases, representing 38% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Lawrence Teh has demonstrated expertise across 107 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	25 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced51% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 25 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	11 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 11 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	11 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice49% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 11 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	11 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 11 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Evidence	6 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice34% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	5 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized76% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Admiralty and Maritime Law	5 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized89% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced64% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Torts	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Shipping Law	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized79% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	4 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	4 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice36% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	4 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced71% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	4 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Costs	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wrongful arrest	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced74% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	3 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sale of Goods	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Lawrence Teh 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 Practice28% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Aviation Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appellate Litigation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conversion	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Arrest of Vessel	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Collections	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lawrence Teh 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	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Bills of Lading	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Sale Pendente Lite	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Letters of Indemnity	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Choses in Action	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Singapore International Commercial Court	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Wrongful Dismissal	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Mortgage Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Pre-action discovery	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Sale of Property	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Lending and security	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Duty of full and frank disclosure	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
General Principles	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Deeds of Undertaking	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Best Efforts Clause	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Guarantees and indemnities	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh 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 Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh 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	Experienced60% relevance score	Lawrence Teh 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 Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Limitation of Liability	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Presumption of Similarity	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Alteration of Position	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Inducement	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Admiralty Jurisdiction	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Marine Bunker Fuel	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Quantity Surveying	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Building Contracts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Chattel Mortgage	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
In Rem Action	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Liquidation of foreign company	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Letter of Indemnity Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Metal Commodities Trading	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Interpleader Relief	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Carriage by Air	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
SIA Standard Conditions	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh 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	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Business Formation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Lawrence Teh 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 Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Forum Non Conveniens	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Real Estate	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Transportation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Wrongful Death	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Performance Bond	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Assignment Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Natural forum	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Interim injunctions	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Abuse of Process	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Extension of Time	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Set-off	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Discovery of documents	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Negligent misrepresentation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Admiralty Jurisdiction and Arrest	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Illegality	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Choice of Law	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Approbation and Reprobation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Assessment of Damages	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Liquidation	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Guarantee	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Crossclaims	1 cases	0% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Disclosure of documents	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lawrence Teh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 0% of their total caseload.
Ship Mortgage	1 cases	0% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lawrence Teh 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

Lawrence Teh has been affiliated with 4 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 11 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Rodyk and Davidson	11 cases	38% of cases	Treasure Valley Group Ltd v Saputra Teddy: Admiralty Jurisdiction, Vessel Arrest & Approbation/Reprobation(Nov 2005) RBG Resources plc v Credit Lyonnais: Foreign Company Liquidation & Creditor's Debt Claim(Oct 2005) Woh Hup v Lian Teck: Pre-Action Discovery & Arbitration Clauses in Construction Disputes(May 2005)
Rodyk & Davidson	9 cases	31% of cases	Abdul Salam Asanaru Pillai v Nomanbhoy: Summary Judgment, Equitable Set-Off & Cashew Nut Contracts Dispute(Mar 2007) Banque Cantonale Vaudoise v RBG Resources: Stay of Proceedings for Non-Existent Metal Cargoes(Nov 2002) Joseph Clement Louis Arokiasamy v Singapore Airlines: Dismissal & Natural Justice(Aug 2002)
Rodyk & Davidson LLP	6 cases	21% of cases	Big Port Service DMCC v Owner of Vessel “XIN CHANG SHU”: Leave to Appeal Wrongful Arrest Order(May 2016) Big Port Service DMCC v Xin Chang Shu: Wrongful Arrest & Agency in Bunker Supply(Dec 2015) Big Port Service DMCC v China Shipping: Wrongful Arrest & Agency in Bunker Supply Dispute(Aug 2015)
Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP	3 cases	10% of cases	JTrust Asia v Group Lease: Tort of Deceit, Conspiracy & Mareva Injunctions(May 2020) JTrust Asia v Group Lease Holdings: Fraud, Misrepresentation & Conspiracy Claim(Feb 2020) IM Skaugen v MAN Diesel: Misrepresentation, Assignment, and Forum in Marine Engine Fuel Consumption Dispute(May 2018)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Lawrence Teh's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.2
Complex Cases: 11 (38%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	114.1 parties avg	4.1	38%
Neutral	19.0 parties avg	9.0	3%
Partial	73.3 parties avg	3.3	24%
Unknown	18.0 parties avg	8.0	3%
Won	94.3 parties avg	4.3	31%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	42.4 parties avg	2.4
2001	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2002	25.5 parties avg	5.5
2004	74.9 parties avg	4.9
2005	43.6 parties avg	3.6
2007	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2012	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2015	32.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2018	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2020	29.0 parties avg	9.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	11(38%)	38%
Neutral	1(3%)	3%
Partial	7(24%)	24%
Unknown	1(3%)	3%
Won	9(31%)	31%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	20,000.00	1,333.3315 cases	15
USD	316,946.76	158,473.382 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	4 31	Partial: 3 cases (75.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2001	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2002	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)
2004	7 3112	Lost: 3 cases (42.9%) Partial: 1 cases (14.3%) Unknown: 1 cases (14.3%) Won: 2 cases (28.6%)
2005	4 31	Lost: 3 cases (75.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2007	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2012	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2016	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 29 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	JTrust Asia v Group Lease: Tort of Deceit, Conspiracy & Mareva Injunctions 31 May 2020 Mitsuji Konoshita (Respondent)Lost	31 May 2020	Mitsuji Konoshita (Respondent): Domestic Mareva injunction reinstatedDomestic Mareva injunction against Mitsuji Konoshita reinstated. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	JTrust Asia v Group Lease Holdings: Fraud, Misrepresentation & Conspiracy Claim 11 Feb 2020 Mitsuji Konoshita (Defendant)Won	11 Feb 2020	Mitsuji Konoshita (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment for the Defendant; plaintiff's claims dismissed. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the jurisdiction is Singapore.
3	IM Skaugen v MAN Diesel: Misrepresentation, Assignment, and Forum in Marine Engine Fuel Consumption Dispute 24 May 2018 IM Skaugen Marine Services Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	24 May 2018	IM Skaugen Marine Services Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed, Singapore is the appropriate forum.
4	Big Port Service DMCC v Owner of Vessel “XIN CHANG SHU”: Leave to Appeal Wrongful Arrest Order 17 May 2016 Big Port Service DMCC (Plaintiff)Lost	17 May 2016	Big Port Service DMCC (Plaintiff): Application dismissedApplication for a declaration that the plaintiff does not require leave of court to appeal against the Wrongful Arrest order was dismissed. The plaintiff was ordered to pay the defendant’s costs which was fixed at $10,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Big Port Service DMCC v Xin Chang Shu: Wrongful Arrest & Agency in Bunker Supply 03 Dec 2015 Big Port Service DMCC (Plaintiff, Respondent)Lost	03 Dec 2015	Big Port Service DMCC (Plaintiff, Respondent): Appeal DismissedPlaintiff's appeal dismissed and ordered to pay costs of $10,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Big Port Service DMCC v China Shipping: Wrongful Arrest & Agency in Bunker Supply Dispute 10 Aug 2015 Big Port Service DMCC (Plaintiff)Lost	10 Aug 2015	Big Port Service DMCC (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedThe Plaintiff's claim was dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	AQZ v ARA: Setting Aside Arbitral Award for Lack of Jurisdiction & Expedited Procedure 12 Feb 2015 ARA (Defendant)Won	12 Feb 2015	ARA (Defendant): Application dismissedThe application to set aside the arbitral award was dismissed, upholding the award in favor of ARA.
8	Alpha Bank S.A. v The "Sea Urchin": Application for Direct Judicial Sale of Vessel 06 Feb 2014 Keel Marine Company Limited (Defendant)Won	06 Feb 2014	Keel Marine Company Limited (Defendant): Application dismissedThe application for direct sale of the vessel was dismissed.
9	BS Mount Sophia v Join-Aim: Interim Injunction & Unconscionable Call on Performance Bond 08 May 2012 BS Mount Sophia Pte Ltd (Appellant)Lost	08 May 2012	BS Mount Sophia Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs. The court found a strong prima facie case of unconscionability justifying the continuance of the injunction restraining the Appellant’s call on the Bond pending arbitration. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
10	Abdul Salam Asanaru Pillai v Nomanbhoy: Summary Judgment, Equitable Set-Off & Cashew Nut Contracts Dispute 29 Mar 2007 Nomanbhoy & Sons Pte Ltd (Defendant)Partial	29 Mar 2007	Nomanbhoy & Sons Pte Ltd (Defendant): Conditional Leave to DefendConditional leave to defend the Abbas claim by requiring that security in the sum of US$316,946.76 be furnished.
11	Treasure Valley Group Ltd v Saputra Teddy: Admiralty Jurisdiction, Vessel Arrest & Approbation/Reprobation 20 Nov 2005 Ultramarine Holdings Limited (Intervener)Won	20 Nov 2005	Ultramarine Holdings Limited (Intervener): Appeal dismissedAppeal dismissed with costs in the cause (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
12	RBG Resources plc v Credit Lyonnais: Foreign Company Liquidation & Creditor's Debt Claim 27 Oct 2005 Credit Lyonnais (Defendant, Applicant)Lost	27 Oct 2005	Credit Lyonnais (Defendant, Applicant): Application dismissedApplication to admit proof of debt against the Singapore liquidation estate of RBG was dismissed.
13	Woh Hup v Lian Teck: Pre-Action Discovery & Arbitration Clauses in Construction Disputes 09 May 2005 NCC International Aktiebolag (Appellant)Lost	09 May 2005	NCC International Aktiebolag (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
14	Projector SA v Marubeni: Appeal Against Mandatory Injunction Over Vessel Arrest Under Letter of Indemnity 24 Jan 2005 Projector SA (Appellant)Lost	24 Jan 2005	Projector SA (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the currency of the jurisdiction.
15	Projector SA v Marubeni: Amendment of Notice of Appeal and Prejudice to Respondent 02 Dec 2004 Projector SA (Appellant, Defendant)Won	02 Dec 2004	Projector SA (Appellant, Defendant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; order made on 16 July 2004 by Woo J set aside. Leave granted to amend notice of appeal (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
16	Lian Teck Construction v Woh Hup: Pre-Action Discovery & Arbitration Clause Scope 16 Nov 2004 NCC International Aktiebolag (Defendant)Lost	16 Nov 2004	NCC International Aktiebolag (Defendant): Appeal DismissedThe defendants' appeal against the order for pre-action discovery was dismissed. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
17	RBG Resources plc v Banque Cantonale Vaudoise: Appeal Leave on Costs & Sale of Goods Act 10 Aug 2004 Credit Lyonnais (Defendant, Respondent)	10 Aug 2004	Credit Lyonnais (Defendant, Respondent): -
18	Projector SA v Marubeni: Amendment of Notice of Appeal & Factors for Consideration 10 Aug 2004 Projector SA (Appellant)Lost	10 Aug 2004	Projector SA (Appellant): Application dismissed with costsProjector SA's application to amend the notice of appeal was dismissed, and Projector SA was ordered to pay the costs of the application. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
19	RBG Resources v Banque Cantonale: Costs & Interest on Conversion Claim 05 Aug 2004 Credit Lyonnais (Defendant)Lost	05 Aug 2004	Credit Lyonnais (Defendant): Counterclaim DismissedCounterclaim dismissed, save for one drum of nickel. Currency assumed to be SGD, the currency of the jurisdiction.
20	RBG Resources plc v Banque Cantonale Vaudoise: Sale of Goods, Metal Transactions & Liquidator's Rights 10 Jun 2004 Credit Lyonnais (Defendant)Partial	10 Jun 2004	Credit Lyonnais (Defendant): Claim Dismissed in PartCL's counterclaim is dismissed save for the said drum of nickel for which I declare CL to be the legal and beneficial owner. The sale proceeds of that drum of nickel are to be released to CL or its solicitors, as CL’s solicitors may direct, subject to any set-off in view of (c) above. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
21	Arokiasamy v. Singapore Airlines: Termination of Employment under Employment Act 08 Jan 2004 Singapore Airlines Ltd (Respondent)Won	08 Jan 2004	Singapore Airlines Ltd (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs to be agreed or taxed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
22	Banque Cantonale Vaudoise v RBG Resources: Stay of Proceedings for Non-Existent Metal Cargoes 06 Nov 2002 Credit Lyonnais (Other)Neutral	06 Nov 2002	Credit Lyonnais (Other): NeutralOther party to the proceedings.
23	Joseph Clement Louis Arokiasamy v Singapore Airlines: Dismissal & Natural Justice 29 Aug 2002 Singapore Airlines Ltd (Defendant, Respondent)Partial	29 Aug 2002	Singapore Airlines Ltd (Defendant, Respondent): Appeal Dismissed in PartThe defendant's application to strike out prayer 11(2) of the plaintiff's claim was upheld.
24	Tan Shwu Leng v Singapore Airlines: Negligence, Damages Assessment & Mitigation 19 Mar 2001 Singapore Airlines Limited (Respondent, Defendant)Partial	19 Mar 2001	Singapore Airlines Limited (Respondent, Defendant): Costs partially awarded againstCosts partially awarded against Singapore Airlines Limited (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
25	Singapore Airlines v Fujitsu: Limitation of Liability under Warsaw Convention 04 Jan 2001 Singapore Airlines Ltd (Appellant)Won	04 Jan 2001	Singapore Airlines Ltd (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; entitled to the protection of the limitation of liability laid down by the Warsaw Convention, as amended by the Hague Protocol.
26	Singapore Airlines v Fujitsu: Warsaw Convention & Liability for Lost Cargo 29 Nov 2000 Malaysian Airlines System Bhd (Appellant)Won	29 Nov 2000	Malaysian Airlines System Bhd (Appellant): Appeal allowedAppeal allowed.
27	Hong Huat v Hiap Hong: Arbitration Award Variation on Costs & Legal Principle Misapprehension 03 Aug 2000 Hong Huat Development Co (Pte) Ltd (Applicant, Appellant)Partial	03 Aug 2000	Hong Huat Development Co (Pte) Ltd (Applicant, Appellant): Costs of Originating Motion 12 of 1999 awardedAppellants awarded costs of Originating Motion 12 of 1999 up to 6 July 2000 on a standard basis (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
28	Hong Huat v Hiap Hong: Implied Duties of Employers Regarding Architect's Certifying Functions under SIA Conditions 05 Jul 2000 Hong Huat Development Co (Pte) Ltd (Appellant, Respondent)Partial	05 Jul 2000	Hong Huat Development Co (Pte) Ltd (Appellant, Respondent): Appeal allowed in partArbitrator’s award in respect of the first part of Item (a) and in respect of Items (b) to (d) is set aside.
29	Hong Huat Development v Hiap Hong: Appeal Against Refusal to Grant Leave to Appeal Arbitration Award 20 Mar 2000 Hong Huat Development Co (Pte) Ltd (Appellant)Partial	20 Mar 2000	Hong Huat Development Co (Pte) Ltd (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partExtension of time to apply for leave to appeal granted; leave to appeal granted; the hearing of the appeal should proceed in the High Court.