Lee Weiming Andrew

Lee Weiming Andrew is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2016 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 7 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in theft and insurance. Their track record shows a 43.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 29% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated expertise across 30 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and evidence.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	5 cases	12% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice28% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Theft	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Insurance	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Property Insurance	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Testamentary Capacity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Maintenance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mental Capacity Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Lifting corporate veil	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Marine Insurance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Cargo Insurance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
General Principles of Insurance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Child Custody	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Child Support	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Libel, Slander and Defamation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Wills and Probate	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Inducement of Breach of Contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Lee Weiming Andrew has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Lee Weiming Andrew has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
PDLegal LLC	4 cases	57% of cases	WOS v WOT: Division of Matrimonial Assets & Maintenance After 20-Year Marriage(Jul 2023) Chubb Insurance v Sizer Metals: Marine Cargo Insurance Claim for Stolen Tin Concentrate(May 2023) Dialectic PR LLC v Brilliante Resources: Breach of Contract & Lifting Corporate Veil(Feb 2023)
Selvam LLC	2 cases	29% of cases	S. Pacific Resources Ltd v Tomolugen Holdings Ltd: Put Option Validity & Contractual Consideration(May 2016) TDA v TCZ: Appeal Against Statutory Will Order Under Mental Capacity Act Based on Undue Influence Allegations(Apr 2016)
Peter Doraisamy LLC	1 cases	14% of cases	Ezion Holdings Ltd v Credit Suisse AG: Defamation Claim & Striking Out Plea of Malice(Jun 2017)

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.7
Complex Cases: 2 (29%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Dismissed	14.0 parties avg	4.0	14%
Lost	22.0 parties avg	2.0	29%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	14%
Won	33.0 parties avg	3.0	43%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2016	23.5 parties avg	3.5
2017	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2022	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	32.7 parties avg	2.7

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Dismissed	1(14%)	14%
Lost	2(29%)	29%
Partial	1(14%)	14%
Won	3(43%)	43%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	8,031,063.95	2,007,765.994 cases	4
USD	2,309,017.88	1,154,508.942 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2016	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2017	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	3 111	Dismissed: 1 cases (33.3%) Partial: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)

Case History

Displaying all 7 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	WOS v WOT: Division of Matrimonial Assets & Maintenance After 20-Year Marriage 30 Jul 2023 WOS (Plaintiff)Partial	30 Jul 2023	WOS (Plaintiff): Claim partially allowedWife was awarded $8,022,063.95 as part of the division of matrimonial assets (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Chubb Insurance v Sizer Metals: Marine Cargo Insurance Claim for Stolen Tin Concentrate 02 May 2023 Sizer Metals Pte Ltd (Respondent, Plaintiff)Won	02 May 2023	Sizer Metals Pte Ltd (Respondent, Plaintiff): Appeal DismissedClaim for US$1,154,508.94 allowed in the lower court; appeal dismissed and Chubb ordered to pay costs of $80,000 (all in).
3	Dialectic PR LLC v Brilliante Resources: Breach of Contract & Lifting Corporate Veil 16 Feb 2023 Woon Joon Foong, Jerrel (Defendant)Dismissed	16 Feb 2023	Woon Joon Foong, Jerrel (Defendant): Claim DismissedPlaintiffs’ claim against the 2nd Defendant dismissed.
4	Sizer Metals v Chubb Insurance: Marine Cargo Insurance Claim for Stolen Tin Concentrate 10 Mar 2022 Sizer Metals Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	10 Mar 2022	Sizer Metals Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; damages awarded in the amount of $1,154,508.94 (specified USD).
5	Ezion Holdings Ltd v Credit Suisse AG: Defamation Claim & Striking Out Plea of Malice 01 Jun 2017 Ezion Holdings Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant)Lost	01 Jun 2017	Ezion Holdings Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; Ezion ordered to pay costs of $4,000 with reasonable disbursements to Credit Suisse. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	S. Pacific Resources Ltd v Tomolugen Holdings Ltd: Put Option Validity & Contractual Consideration 09 May 2016 Tomolugen Holdings Ltd (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	09 May 2016	Tomolugen Holdings Ltd (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed and default judgment against the defendant restored. The defendant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal fixed at $5000 plus disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	TDA v TCZ: Appeal Against Statutory Will Order Under Mental Capacity Act Based on Undue Influence Allegations 11 Apr 2016 TCZ (Respondent, Plaintiff)Won	11 Apr 2016	TCZ (Respondent, Plaintiff): Judgment upheldOriginal decision of the District Judge was upheld.