Lim How Khang

Lim How Khang is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2011 to 2016. The lawyer has handled 9 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in misuse of drugs act and courier. Their track record shows a 67.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Lim How Khang has demonstrated expertise across 17 primary practice areas, with significant experience in criminal law and misuse of drugs act.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Criminal Law	9 cases	22% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 9 cases which represents 22% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	7 cases	17% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 17% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	5 cases	12% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Evidence	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	3 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Appeal	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Courier	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Unlicensed moneylending	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Moneylending Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Admissibility of evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Diminished Responsibility	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Culpable Homicide	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Psychiatry	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Drug Trafficking	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lim How Khang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Lim How Khang has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 9 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	9 cases	100% of cases	Abdul Kahar v Public Prosecutor: Trafficking, Misuse of Drugs Act & Knowledge of Drugs(Feb 2016) PP v Muhammad Farid: Trafficking, Misuse of Drugs Act & Adverse Inference(Mar 2015) Public Prosecutor v Prabagaran: Drug Importation & Presumption of Knowledge(Nov 2014)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Lim How Khang's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.0
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	11%
Neutral	12.0 parties avg	2.0	11%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	11%
Won	62.0 parties avg	2.0	67%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2011	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2013	32.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	32.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Lim How Khang's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(11%)	11%
Neutral	1(11%)	11%
Partial	1(11%)	11%
Won	6(67%)	67%

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2011	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	3 12	Neutral: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2014	3 12	Partial: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2015	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 9 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Abdul Kahar v Public Prosecutor: Trafficking, Misuse of Drugs Act & Knowledge of Drugs 23 Feb 2016 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	23 Feb 2016	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe Public Prosecutor successfully defended the appeal against the conviction and sentence.
2	PP v Muhammad Farid: Trafficking, Misuse of Drugs Act & Adverse Inference 10 Mar 2015 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Lost	10 Mar 2015	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe Prosecution's appeal against the High Court's decision was dismissed.
3	Public Prosecutor v Prabagaran: Drug Importation & Presumption of Knowledge 02 Nov 2014 Public Prosecutor (Plaintiff)Won	02 Nov 2014	Public Prosecutor (Plaintiff): Guilty as chargedThe accused was found guilty as charged.
4	Lim Ghim Peow v PP: Culpable Homicide & Diminished Responsibility Sentencing 16 Oct 2014 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	16 Oct 2014	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Sentence AffirmedThe Public Prosecutor's original sentence of 20 years' imprisonment was affirmed by the Court of Appeal.
5	PP v Muhammad Farid: Trafficking in Methamphetamine & Knowledge of Drug Quantity 29 Jun 2014 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Partial	29 Jun 2014	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): PartialThe prosecution's charge was amended, and the accused was convicted on the amended charge.
6	Public Prosecutor v Abdul Kahar bin Othman: Sentencing under the Misuse of Drugs Act 23 Oct 2013 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Neutral	23 Oct 2013	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Accused found to be a courierThe court found that the accused acted as a courier only, giving him the benefit of the doubt under the new sentencing provisions.
7	Public Prosecutor v Abdul Kahar bin Othman: Trafficking of Diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act 26 Aug 2013 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	26 Aug 2013	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for ProsecutionThe Public Prosecutor won the case against the accused.
8	Public Prosecutor v Lee Pit Chin: Unlicensed Moneylending by Estate Agent 19 Aug 2013 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	19 Aug 2013	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe Prosecution's appeal against the sentence was allowed, and the Respondent's imprisonment term was increased.
9	Mohammad Ashik v PP: Statutory Interpretation of Misuse of Drugs Act & Admissibility of Evidence 06 Sep 2011 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	06 Sep 2011	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Judgment UpheldThe Public Prosecutor successfully defended the appeal, upholding the appellant's conviction.