Mark Tang Yu Zhong

Mark Tang Yu Zhong is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2024 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in contracts and enforcement of foreign judgments. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 50% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated expertise across 23 primary practice areas, with significant experience in commercial disputes and breach of contract.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Commercial Disputes	2 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Foreign Judgments	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Equitable Estoppel	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Maintenance	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Contractual terms	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Consent Orders	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Service out of jurisdiction	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Amendment of Pleadings	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Contempt of Court	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Abuse of Process	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Champerty	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Riddick principle	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mark Tang Yu Zhong has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Mark Tang Yu Zhong has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP	2 cases	100% of cases	Sang Cheol Woo v Charles Choi Spackman: Amendment of Defence, Abuse of Process & Riddick Principle(Nov 2024) Seatrium New Energy v HJ Shipbuilding: Contractual Terms, Warranties & Estoppel(Sep 2024)

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 7.3
Complex Cases: 1 (50%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	50%
Won	110.0 parties avg	10.0	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2024	27.3 parties avg	7.3

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(50%)	50%
Won	1(50%)	50%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2024	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Sang Cheol Woo v Charles Choi Spackman: Amendment of Defence, Abuse of Process & Riddick Principle 25 Nov 2024 Kim So Hee (Defendant, Respondent)Won	25 Nov 2024	Kim So Hee (Defendant, Respondent): Leave to amend Defence grantedThe Assistant Registrar granted leave to the 2nd and 3rd Defendants to amend their Defence. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Seatrium New Energy v HJ Shipbuilding: Contractual Terms, Warranties & Estoppel 15 Sep 2024 Seatrium New Energy Ltd (formerly known as Keppel FELS Ltd) (Appellant)Lost	15 Sep 2024	Seatrium New Energy Ltd (formerly known as Keppel FELS Ltd) (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; costs awarded to the respondent in the sum of S$60,000 including disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.