Mark Jayaratnam

Mark Jayaratnam is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2011 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 20 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and misuse of drugs act. Their track record shows a 60.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 3 complex cases, representing 15% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated expertise across 37 primary practice areas, with significant experience in criminal law and criminal procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Criminal Law	17 cases	15% of total caseload	Highly Specialized82% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 17 cases which represents 15% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	13 cases	12% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 13 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	12 cases	11% of total caseload	Highly Specialized96% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 12 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	8 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced69% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Evidence	6 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Criminal Revision	6 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced56% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice28% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Offences	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Appeal	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Statutory offences	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
International Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Extradition Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Admissibility of evidence	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Road Traffic Act	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam 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	Experienced60% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Bail Review	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Robbery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Workplace Safety and Health	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Penal Code	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Road Traffic Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Retraction of Plea	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mitigation Plea	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
National Service Offences	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insurance Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insurance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam 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	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Private International Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Taxation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Theft	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Traffic Violations	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Import and Export Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Mark Jayaratnam 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

Mark Jayaratnam has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 20 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	20 cases	100% of cases	Mohd Akebal v Public Prosecutor: Criminal Review Application for Drug Trafficking Conviction(Mar 2023) PP v Muhammad Rais: Importation of Methamphetamine under Misuse of Drugs Act(May 2022) Public Prosecutor v Gunalan Goval: Trafficking of Cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act(Apr 2022)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Mark Jayaratnam's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.5
Complex Cases: 3 (15%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	62.2 parties avg	2.2	30%
Partial	23.5 parties avg	3.5	10%
Won	122.5 parties avg	2.5	60%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2011	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2012	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2013	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2014	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2017	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2018	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2019	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2020	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2021	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2022	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	6(30%)	30%
Partial	2(10%)	10%
Won	12(60%)	60%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2011	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2012	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2018	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2019	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2020	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2021	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2022	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 20 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Mohd Akebal v Public Prosecutor: Criminal Review Application for Drug Trafficking Conviction 22 Mar 2023 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	22 Mar 2023	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Application dismissedThe Public Prosecutor successfully opposed the application for review.
2	PP v Muhammad Rais: Importation of Methamphetamine under Misuse of Drugs Act 16 May 2022 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	16 May 2022	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for the ProsecutionAccused sentenced to 25 years’ imprisonment and 15 strokes of the cane.
3	Public Prosecutor v Gunalan Goval: Trafficking of Cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act 24 Apr 2022 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	24 Apr 2022	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for ProsecutionAccused convicted of the charge.
4	Public Prosecutor v Ramendra Krishnan: Trafficking and Possession of Cannabis under the Misuse of Drugs Act 24 Oct 2021 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	24 Oct 2021	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Successful ProsecutionThe Public Prosecutor successfully prosecuted Ramendra Krishnan on charges related to drug trafficking and possession.
5	PP v Mohamad Isham: Trafficking Diamorphine, Chain of Custody Dispute 01 Aug 2021 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	01 Aug 2021	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for the ProsecutionIsham is convicted of the Charge.
6	Beh Chew Boo v Public Prosecutor: Misuse of Drugs Act & Importation of Methamphetamine 12 Oct 2020 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	12 Oct 2020	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Conviction ReversedThe conviction against Beh Chew Boo was reversed.
7	Public Prosecutor v Beh Chew Boo: Misuse of Drugs Act - Importation of Methamphetamine 16 Feb 2020 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	16 Feb 2020	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for ProsecutionAccused convicted of importing methamphetamine and sentenced to death.
8	Mohd Akebal v Public Prosecutor: Drug Trafficking under Misuse of Drugs Act 27 Nov 2019 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	27 Nov 2019	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal by Mohd Akebal was dismissed.
9	MW Group Pte Ltd v Public Prosecutor: Workplace Safety and Health Act Violation and Sentencing Appeal 13 Jan 2019 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Partial	13 Jan 2019	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal against sentence allowedThe appeal against conviction was dismissed, but the appeal against the sentence was allowed, reducing the fine from $200,000 to $160,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
10	Dinesh s/o Rajantheran v Public Prosecutor: Retraction of Guilty Plea and Section 228(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code 22 Nov 2018 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	22 Nov 2018	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe applicant's criminal revision was allowed, and the conviction was set aside.
11	Public Prosecutor v. Abdul Ishak: Importation of Diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act 05 Mar 2018 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	05 Mar 2018	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for Prosecution
12	Pua Hung Jaan Jeffrey Nguyen v Public Prosecutor: Drink Driving Appeal 03 Oct 2017 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	03 Oct 2017	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe Public Prosecutor's opposition to the appeal was unsuccessful (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
13	Public Prosecutor v Abdul Wahid Bin Ismail: Trafficking Diamorphine under Misuse of Drugs Act 19 Apr 2017 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	19 Apr 2017	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for ProsecutionThe Prosecution proved the charge against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
14	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.
15	Veeramani Manikam v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Drug Importation Conviction Allowed 02 Aug 2015 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	02 Aug 2015	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal was allowed, and the conviction was set aside.
16	Mohammed Ibrahim v PP: NS Default Sentencing - Fine Imposed 18 Dec 2014 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	18 Dec 2014	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal was allowed, and the original sentence was overturned.
17	Hia Soo Gan Benson v PP: Extradition, Criminal Procedure - Jurisdiction and Appeal 14 Jul 2013 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	14 Jul 2013	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Motions DismissedThe Public Prosecutor successfully argued against the criminal motions filed by the applicants.
18	Wong Yuh Lan v Public Prosecutor: Extradition, Conspiracy to Defraud the US, Export Regulations 06 Aug 2012 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Partial	06 Aug 2012	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Partial LossApplications of Wong Yuh Lan and Lim Yong Nam allowed; applications of Lim Kow Seng and Hia Soo Gan Benson dismissed.
19	Muhammad Faizal v PP: Motor Vehicle Act & Special Reasons Exception 03 Oct 2011 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	03 Oct 2011	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal UpheldThe Public Prosecutor's position was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
20	Jayasekara v Public Prosecutor: Robbery Conviction Appeal Based on Insufficient Evidence 10 Mar 2011 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	10 Mar 2011	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.