Lin Yan Yan

Lin Yan Yan is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2007 to 2009. The lawyer has handled 5 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in winding up and judgments and orders. Their track record shows a 40.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated expertise across 20 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and summary judgement.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	5 cases	14% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	3 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	3 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Property Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Irregular Judgment	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Statutory Demand	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Setting Aside Default Judgement	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Tenancy Agreements	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Rules of court	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Foreign Exchange Contracts	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Lin Yan Yan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Lin Yan Yan has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Drew & Napier LLC	5 cases	100% of cases	BNP Paribas v Jurong Shipyard: Injunction Against Winding-Up Petition for Contested Debt(Mar 2009) Mercurine v Canberra: Setting Aside Default Judgment & Delay in Application(Sep 2008) Jurong Shipyard v BNP Paribas: Injunction Against Winding Up for Disputed Debt(Jun 2008)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Lin Yan Yan'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	20%
Partial	22.0 parties avg	2.0	40%
Won	22.0 parties avg	2.0	40%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2007	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2008	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(20%)	20%
Partial	2(40%)	40%
Won	2(40%)	40%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	725,116.81	241,705.603 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2007	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)
2008	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2009	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 5 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	BNP Paribas v Jurong Shipyard: Injunction Against Winding-Up Petition for Contested Debt 08 Mar 2009 Jurong Shipyard Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	08 Mar 2009	Jurong Shipyard Pte Ltd (Respondent): Injunction GrantedInjunction to restrain BNP from commencing winding-up proceedings was granted (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Mercurine v Canberra: Setting Aside Default Judgment & Delay in Application 07 Sep 2008 Canberra Development Pte Ltd (Respondent)Partial	07 Sep 2008	Canberra Development Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal Dismissed in PartAppeal varied; Default Judgment deemed set aside if Mercurine succeeds in Consolidated Suit.
3	Jurong Shipyard v BNP Paribas: Injunction Against Winding Up for Disputed Debt 05 Jun 2008 Jurong Shipyard Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	05 Jun 2008	Jurong Shipyard Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Injunction GrantedInjunction granted to restrain BNP Paribas from commencing winding-up proceedings.
4	Canberra Development v Mercurine: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Unpaid Rent and Possession 25 Oct 2007 Canberra Development Pte Ltd (Appellant, Plaintiff)Partial	25 Oct 2007	Canberra Development Pte Ltd (Appellant, Plaintiff): Appeal Allowed in PartAppeal allowed in part. The default judgment was reinstated but varied so that the amount payable thereunder shall be altered to $725,116.81. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Canberra Development v Mercurine: Setting Aside Default Judgment for Excessive Sum 27 Jun 2007 Canberra Development Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	27 Jun 2007	Canberra Development Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Default Judgment set asideThe default judgment obtained by Canberra Development Pte Ltd against Mercurine Pte Ltd was set aside due to irregularities. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.