Lee Sing Lit

Lee Sing Lit is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2001 to 2010. The lawyer has handled 6 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and employment law. Their track record shows a 83.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated expertise across 27 primary practice areas, with significant experience in criminal law and criminal procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Criminal Law	6 cases	15% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 15% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	6 cases	15% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 15% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice18% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Immigration	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Legal Malpractice	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Statutory offences	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Murder	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Offences	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
False Claim	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
General exceptions	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Arms Offences Act	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Penal Code	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Private Defence	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Right to Counsel	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Cash Back Arrangement	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Constitutional Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lee Sing Lit has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Lee Sing Lit has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	5 cases	83% of cases	Tan Chin Hock v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Dismissed in Drug Trafficking Case(Dec 2010) PP v Hirris anak Martin: Enhanced Sentence for Robbery with Grievous Hurt(Mar 2010) Bachoo Mohan Singh v PP: False Claim, Solicitor's Duty, and Penal Code Interpretation(Dec 2009)
Deputy Public Prosecutors	1 cases	17% of cases	Loh Kim Lan v Public Prosecutor: Abetting Employment of Immigration Offender(Jan 2001)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Lee Sing Lit's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.5
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Partial	13.0 parties avg	3.0	17%
Won	52.4 parties avg	2.4	83%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2001	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2008	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2010	22.5 parties avg	2.5

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Lee Sing Lit's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Partial	1(17%)	17%
Won	5(83%)	83%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2001	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2010	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 6 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Tan Chin Hock v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Dismissed in Drug Trafficking Case 15 Dec 2010 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	15 Dec 2010	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Conviction UpheldThe conviction of the appellant for drug trafficking was upheld.
2	PP v Hirris anak Martin: Enhanced Sentence for Robbery with Grievous Hurt 02 Mar 2010 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	02 Mar 2010	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe prosecution's appeal was allowed, and the respondents' sentences were increased.
3	Bachoo Mohan Singh v PP: False Claim, Solicitor's Duty, and Penal Code Interpretation 03 Dec 2009 Public Prosecutor (Respondent, Applicant)Partial	03 Dec 2009	Public Prosecutor (Respondent, Applicant): Extension of time granted to apply to the High Court Judge for leave to raise questions to the Court of AppealExtension of time granted to apply to the High Court Judge for leave to raise questions to the Court of Appeal.
4	Bachoo Mohan Singh v PP: Abetting False Claim, Cash Back Scheme, Lawyer's Knowledge 24 May 2009 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	24 May 2009	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal against conviction upheldAppeal against conviction upheld.
5	Tan Chor Jin v PP: Arms Offenses, Intoxication, Accident, Private Defence & Right to Counsel 17 Jul 2008 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	17 Jul 2008	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe Public Prosecutor successfully defended against the appeal.
6	Loh Kim Lan v Public Prosecutor: Abetting Employment of Immigration Offender 02 Jan 2001 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	02 Jan 2001	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentThe Public Prosecutor successfully defended the appeals against the convictions.