Madan Assomull

Madan Assomull is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 17 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and personal injury. Their track record shows a 24.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 6% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Madan Assomull has demonstrated expertise across 74 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil practice.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	12 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced52% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 12 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	5 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized76% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced59% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Automobile Accidents	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced69% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized82% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Damages	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced52% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Court Dispute Resolution	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Home	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estate Administration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Maintenance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Disciplinary Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Vicarious liability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Illegality and public policy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Professional conduct	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Double Recovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Collateral Benefits	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Loss of future earnings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Show cause action	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Settlement Agreements	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty of disclosure	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Improper Conduct	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Constructive Trust	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Quantification of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Caveats	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Writ of Seizure and Sale	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Best Efforts Clause	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Guarantees and indemnities	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Locus Standi	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Loss of Earning Capacity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Operational Losses	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Solicitor's Letter	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Real Estate Agency	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Attachment Order	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Business Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Leasing	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conveyance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conveyancing	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Cross-Border Insolvency	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Divorce	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insurance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insurance Bad Faith	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Land Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mediation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Property Damage	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Madan Assomull has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Madan Assomull has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 15 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Assomull & Partners	15 cases	88% of cases	Law Society of Singapore v de Souza Christopher James: Disciplinary Proceedings & Professional Conduct(Nov 2023) Lalwani Ashok v Lalwani Shalini: Setting Aside Statutory Demand for Estate Sums(Jan 2019) Bombay Talkies v United Overseas Bank: Winding-Up Order Appeal Based on Compounded Debt(Nov 2015)
Assomull and Partners	2 cases	12% of cases	ABC Supermarket v Kosma Holdings: Claim for Operational Losses Due to Defective Air-Conditioning(Feb 2005) Lo Lee Len v Grand Interior Renovation: Negligence, Damages & Double Recovery(Feb 2004)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Madan Assomull's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.3
Complex Cases: 1 (6%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	82.1 parties avg	2.1	47%
Partial	52.0 parties avg	2.0	29%
Won	43.0 parties avg	3.0	24%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	42.0 parties avg	2.0
2004	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2005	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2006	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2007	42.0 parties avg	2.0
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2019	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2023	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	8(47%)	47%
Partial	5(29%)	29%
Won	4(24%)	24%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	155,673.50	11,974.8813 cases	13

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	4 211	Lost: 2 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (25.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2004	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2007	4 211	Lost: 2 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (25.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2010	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 17 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Law Society of Singapore v de Souza Christopher James: Disciplinary Proceedings & Professional Conduct 06 Nov 2023 Law Society of Singapore (Applicant)Lost	06 Nov 2023	Law Society of Singapore (Applicant): Application DismissedThe Law Society's application for sanctions against Mr. de Souza was dismissed.
2	Lalwani Ashok v Lalwani Shalini: Setting Aside Statutory Demand for Estate Sums 01 Jan 2019 Lalwani Ashok Bherumal (Plaintiff)Lost	01 Jan 2019	Lalwani Ashok Bherumal (Plaintiff): Appeal LostAppeal lost; required to pay the corrected sum of $425,338.87 within 21 days. (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore)
3	Bombay Talkies v United Overseas Bank: Winding-Up Order Appeal Based on Compounded Debt 26 Nov 2015 BOMBAY TALKIES (S) PTE LTD (Appellant)Lost	26 Nov 2015	BOMBAY TALKIES (S) PTE LTD (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; Bombay Talkies to pay United Overseas Bank costs fixed at $20,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Koh Chai Kwang v Teo Ai Ling: Appeal on Damages for Motor Accident Injuries and Loss of Future Earnings 19 May 2011 Koh Chai Kwang (Appellant)Partial	19 May 2011	Koh Chai Kwang (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part; the sum awarded by the Judge for loss of future earnings was substituted by a provisional damage order on the basis of loss of earning capacity. No monetary amount specified.
5	Teo Ai Ling v Koh Chai Kwang: Personal Injury Claim for Damages Assessment 11 Feb 2010 Koh Chai Kwang (Defendant, Respondent)Lost	11 Feb 2010	Koh Chai Kwang (Defendant, Respondent): Appeal DismissedDefendant's appeal dismissed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Lock Han Chng Jonathan v Goh Jessiline: Court-Mediated Settlement Enforcement & Solicitor Conduct in Road Accident Claim 30 Dec 2007 Goh Jessiline (Respondent)Lost	30 Dec 2007	Goh Jessiline (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; Respondent shall pay the Appellant’s costs of this appeal fixed at $5,000 with the usual consequential orders for the return of the security deposit for costs. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Reindeer Developments v Mindpower Innovations: Land Sale Contract Dispute 03 Oct 2007 Reindeer Developments Inc (Plaintiff)Lost	03 Oct 2007	Reindeer Developments Inc (Plaintiff): Application dismissedThe plaintiff's application for an order that the defendant remove the Caveat and for a declaration that the defendant had not been granted a valid and enforceable option to purchase the property was dismissed.
8	NTUC Income v Toh Kheng Boon: Motor Insurance, Use for Reward & Amendment of Pleadings 22 Jul 2007 NTUC Income Insurance Co-operative Ltd (Appellant)Partial	22 Jul 2007	NTUC Income Insurance Co-operative Ltd (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partThe district judge's order for NTUC Income to indemnify the owners of the lorries involved in the accident was overruled.
9	Lock Han Chng Jonathan v Goh Jessiline: Jurisdiction of Settlement Judge in Court Dispute Resolution 26 Apr 2007 Goh Jessiline (Defendant, Appellant)Won	26 Apr 2007	Goh Jessiline (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed with costs to be taxed unless otherwise agreed. The Order of Court is set aside together with the execution proceedings in writ of seizure and sale no. 2057 of 2006. The plaintiff is ordered to reimburse the defendant all costs and disbursements paid by the defendant towards the Order of Court and the writ of seizure and sale, with interest at 6% from the date of the defendant’s payment until date of refund. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
10	Hin Hup Bus Service v Tay Chwee Hiang: Vicarious Liability & Fraudulent Claims in Road Accidents 24 Sep 2006 Hin Hup Bus Service (a firm) (Appellant, Defendant)Won	24 Sep 2006	Hin Hup Bus Service (a firm) (Appellant, Defendant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; judgment below set aside; order for costs below reversed in favor of the appellant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
11	Chin Tyng Lei v Lim Yoon Ngok: Summary Judgment and Loan Dispute 11 Jul 2006 Chin Tyng Lei (Plaintiff, Respondent)Partial	11 Jul 2006	Chin Tyng Lei (Plaintiff, Respondent): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff in the amount of $70,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
12	ABC Supermarket v Kosma Holdings: Claim for Operational Losses Due to Defective Air-Conditioning 27 Feb 2005 ABC Supermarket Pte Ltd (Appellant)Partial	27 Feb 2005	ABC Supermarket Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part, damages increased to $54,623.50, including rectification costs and compensation for additional losses. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
13	Lo Lee Len v Grand Interior Renovation: Negligence, Damages & Double Recovery 09 Feb 2004 Grand Interior Renovation Works Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	09 Feb 2004	Grand Interior Renovation Works Pte Ltd (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentJudgment for the respondent for $450 (policy excess) and $600 (loss of use). Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
14	Pushpavalli v Shanmuga Nathan: Division of Matrimonial Assets and Maintenance in Divorce 13 Nov 2000 Pushpavalli d/o Govindaraju (Appellant)Partial	13 Nov 2000	Pushpavalli d/o Govindaraju (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part, varying the order relating to maintenance. The lump sum award is set aside and a monthly sum of $200 shall be paid with effect from 1 October 1999. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
15	Focus Electronics v Touch Universal: Validity of Sale Agreement & Caveat 23 Aug 2000 Focus Electronics Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	23 Aug 2000	Focus Electronics Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Action DismissedPlaintiffs' action to invalidate the sale agreement and remove the caveat was dismissed with costs. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
16	Emjay Enterprises v Thakral Brothers: Setting Aside Attachment Order & Priority of Sale Proceeds 30 Jul 2000 Emjay Enterprises Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	30 Jul 2000	Emjay Enterprises Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Application dismissedThe originating summons was dismissed with costs fixed at $5,000 to be paid by the plaintiffs to the defendants. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
17	Hemlata Pathela v Suresh Partabrai: Unlicensed Agent's Commission Claim & Contract Enforceability 04 Jul 2000 Suresh Partabrai (Defendant, Respondent)Won	04 Jul 2000	Suresh Partabrai (Defendant, Respondent): Claim DismissedThe defendant's application to strike out the plaintiff's claim was successful.