Mak Sushan Melissa

Mak Sushan Melissa is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2017 to 2025. The lawyer has handled 14 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in costs and minority oppression. Their track record shows a 53.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 4 complex cases, representing 29% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated expertise across 62 primary practice areas, with significant experience in civil procedure and contract law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Civil Procedure	8 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 8 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	7 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	5 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice31% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice42% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Negligence	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Costs	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Minority Oppression	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Trust	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice18% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Receivership	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contractual terms	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Revenue Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Foreign Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Limitation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa 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	General Practice30% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Duty of Care	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Expert evidence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Valuation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Inherent Jurisdiction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judicial Review	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Recognition of foreign solvent liquidation proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Resulting Trust	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Quantification of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duty	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trust Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Trade Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Security Interest	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Express Trust	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Equity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Public Interest Privilege	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Official Secrecy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Constitutional Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Copyrights	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Equitable Compensation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa 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	General Practice10% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Recognition of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Shareholder Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Mak Sushan Melissa 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

Mak Sushan Melissa has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 14 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Allen & Gledhill LLP	14 cases	100% of cases	Kiri Industries v Senda International: Minority Oppression, En Bloc Sale, and Share Valuation(Jan 2025) Kiri Industries v Senda International Capital: En Bloc Sale, Priority of Proceeds & Costs(Aug 2024) Credit Suisse Trust Ltd v Ivanishvili: Breach of Fiduciary Duty & Equitable Compensation(Jul 2024)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Mak Sushan Melissa's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.4
Complex Cases: 4 (29%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Dismissed	14.0 parties avg	4.0	7%
Lost	24.0 parties avg	4.0	14%
Partial	43.8 parties avg	3.8	29%
Won	83.0 parties avg	3.0	57%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2017	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2018	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2020	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2022	32.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2024	34.0 parties avg	4.0
2025	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Mak Sushan Melissa's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Dismissed	1(7%)	7%
Lost	2(13%)	13%
Partial	4(27%)	27%
Won	8(53%)	53%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
RM	48,682,944.26	48,682,944.261 cases	1
SGD	624,887.40	78,110.938 cases	8
USD	2,089,260,000.00	696,420,000.003 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2017	2 11	Dismissed: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2018	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2020	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2022	3 12	Lost: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2023	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2024	3 3	Partial: 3 cases (100.0%)
2025	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 14 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Kiri Industries v Senda International: Minority Oppression, En Bloc Sale, and Share Valuation 30 Jan 2025 Kiri Industries Limited (Appellant, Plaintiff, Respondent)Partial	30 Jan 2025	Kiri Industries Limited (Appellant, Plaintiff, Respondent): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part, with Senda liable to reimburse Kiri’s costs fixed at S$90,000.00, and Kiri’s disbursements of S$4,837.40. Discretionary enhancement of the sum to be paid to Kiri following the en bloc sale, calculated at 5.33% per annum on US$603.8m running from 3 September 2023 until the date of payment. That sum, as with the Valuation figure, will be paid to Kiri in priority as against Senda out of the net proceeds of the en bloc sale. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Kiri Industries v Senda International Capital: En Bloc Sale, Priority of Proceeds & Costs 28 Aug 2024 Kiri Industries Ltd (Plaintiff)Partial	28 Aug 2024	Kiri Industries Ltd (Plaintiff): Partial success in costs applicationSenda to pay costs in the sum of S$360,050.
3	Credit Suisse Trust Ltd v Ivanishvili: Breach of Fiduciary Duty & Equitable Compensation 04 Jul 2024 Credit Suisse Trust Limited (Appellant)Partial	04 Jul 2024	Credit Suisse Trust Limited (Appellant): Appeal Allowed in PartThe appeal was allowed in part, with adjustments to the quantification of compensation. The original award was US$742.73m. The final amount will be adjusted based on the court's findings. Assumed USD, as the judgment involves US dollar amounts and the underlying transactions were denominated in US dollars.
4	Kiri Industries v Senda International: Oppression Remedy, En Bloc Share Sale 19 May 2024 Kiri Industries Ltd (Plaintiff)Partial	19 May 2024	Kiri Industries Ltd (Plaintiff): Entitled to US$603.8m in priority from en bloc sale proceedsKiri Industries will receive US$603.8 million from the proceeds of the en bloc sale of shares in DyStar, in priority to Senda International Capital Ltd.
5	Ivanishvili v Credit Suisse: Breach of Trust, Quantification of Losses & Costs 18 Sep 2023 Credit Suisse Trust Limited (Defendant)Lost	18 Sep 2023	Credit Suisse Trust Limited (Defendant): Judgment against DefendantThe defendant breached its duty to the plaintiffs to safeguard the Trust assets as at 30 March 2008 and is liable to compensate the plaintiffs for their loss. The defendant shall pay to a Trust Fund, the trustee of such fund being identified by the plaintiffs to be the 2nd plaintiff, the sum of US$742.73m, being the plaintiffs’ losses calculated in accordance with Model 1B from 30 March 2008 to 26 May 2023 and taking into account the Settlement dated 1 December 2022.
6	Acute Result Holdings v CGS-CIMB: Resulting Trust, Security Interest & Contract Breach 27 Jul 2023 CGS-CIMB Securities (Singapore) Pte Ltd (formerly known as CIMB Securities (Singapore) Pte Ltd) (Respondent, Defendant)Won	27 Jul 2023	CGS-CIMB Securities (Singapore) Pte Ltd (formerly known as CIMB Securities (Singapore) Pte Ltd) (Respondent, Defendant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed in its entirety; awarded costs of S$65,000 (inclusive of disbursements) against Acute Result Holdings Limited. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Chen Aun-Li Andrew v Ha Chi Kut: Enforcement of Foreign Judgment under REFJA 30 Nov 2022 Ha Chi Kut (suing as the sole executrix of the estate of Khoo Ee Liam, deceased) (Respondent, Plaintiff)Won	30 Nov 2022	Ha Chi Kut (suing as the sole executrix of the estate of Khoo Ee Liam, deceased) (Respondent, Plaintiff): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; respondent awarded costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Ha Chi Kut v Chen Aun-Li Andrew: Enforcement of Foreign Judgment under REFJA 26 Jun 2022 Ha Chi Kut (Plaintiff, Respondent)Won	26 Jun 2022	Ha Chi Kut (Plaintiff, Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed, Registration Order to stand. Costs fixed at S$8,000 (inclusive of disbursements) to Mdm Ha. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	Mercantile & Maritime Investments Pte Ltd v Iceberg Energy Pte Ltd: Winding Up Application & Arbitration Stay 24 Mar 2022 Mercantile & Maritime Investments Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	24 Mar 2022	Mercantile & Maritime Investments Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Application DismissedWinding-up application dismissed; both parties to bear their own costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
10	COMPASS v SingNet: Copyright Tribunal's Power to Grant Retrospective Orders 12 Oct 2020 SingNet Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	12 Oct 2020	SingNet Pte Ltd (Respondent): WonThe court answered the question in the negative, in favor of the respondent's submission.
11	Kazzaz v. Standard Chartered Bank: Negligent Misrepresentation & Banking Advice 12 Jul 2020 Standard Chartered Bank (Respondent, Defendant)Won	12 Jul 2020	Standard Chartered Bank (Respondent, Defendant): Judgment for RespondentAppeal dismissed; appellants ordered to pay SCB’s costs fixed at S$80,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
12	ARW v Comptroller of Income Tax: Public Interest Privilege & Discovery in Tax Avoidance Case 29 Nov 2018 Comptroller of Income Tax (Respondent)Won	29 Nov 2018	Comptroller of Income Tax (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the Comptroller's application was dismissed.
13	AL Shams Global Ltd v BNP Paribas: Breach of Contract, Duty of Care, and Promissory Estoppel 18 Jun 2018 BNP Paribas (Defendant)Won	18 Jun 2018	BNP Paribas (Defendant): Application dismissedApplication dismissed; costs of the Application to the Bank fixed at $15,000 and disbursements of $2,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
14	Arris Solutions v Asian Broadcasting Network: Breach of Contract & Cross-Border Insolvency 07 Feb 2017 ARRIS TECHNOLOGY, INC (Plaintiff)Won	07 Feb 2017	ARRIS TECHNOLOGY, INC (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the sum of RM48,133,369.76 is entered in favour of the Third Plaintiff against the Defendant.