Matthew Saw

Matthew Saw is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2017. The lawyer has handled 12 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in winding up and personal injury. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 8 complex cases, representing 67% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Matthew Saw has demonstrated expertise across 67 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and company law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	10 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 10 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Company Law	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice44% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Torts	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Conversion	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice18% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Litigation	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Matthew Saw 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 Practice43% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligence	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Sale of Goods	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Duty	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Matthew Saw 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	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Ad Hoc Admission	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Admissibility of evidence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contempt of Court	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Matthew Saw 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	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Director's Duties	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Professional conduct	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Matthew Saw 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	Matthew Saw 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	Experienced70% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Illegality	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Medical Negligence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Liquidation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Medical Registration Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Informed consent	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Deeds of Undertaking	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Patient Autonomy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Ship Design	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Naval Architecture	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Copyright Infringement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
E-discovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Liquidation of foreign company	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Ascertainment of goods	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Defective equipment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Scope of Liability in Negligence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Implied Terms of Contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Matthew Saw 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	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Matthew Saw 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	General Practice10% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Collective Sales	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Construction Defects	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Construction Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Healthcare Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Medical Malpractice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Real Estate	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Strata Title Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Matthew Saw has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Matthew Saw has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 6 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Lee & Lee	6 cases	50% of cases	Yong Thiam Look Peter v Singapore Medical Council: Appeal Against Suspension for Medical Misconduct(Jan 2017) Re Joseph David QC: Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel for Complex International Arbitration Dispute(Dec 2011) Liu Chee Ming v Loo-Lim Shirley: Strata Title Collective Sale Dispute(Jan 2008)
Lee and Lee	5 cases	42% of cases	RBG Resources plc v Credit Lyonnais: Foreign Company Liquidation & Creditor's Debt Claim(Oct 2005) RBG Resources plc v Banque Cantonale Vaudoise: Application for Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel(Oct 2004) RBG Resources plc v Banque Cantonale Vaudoise: Appeal Leave on Costs & Sale of Goods Act(Aug 2004)
M/s Lee & Lee	1 cases	8% of cases	Wartsila v Liu: Copyright Infringement & Discovery of Ship Drawings in AutoCAD Format(Jul 2014)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Matthew Saw's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 5.1
Complex Cases: 8 (67%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	34.7 parties avg	4.7	25%
Neutral	14.0 parties avg	4.0	8%
Partial	44.8 parties avg	4.8	33%
Won	46.0 parties avg	6.0	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2003	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2004	47.5 parties avg	7.5
2005	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2008	18.0 parties avg	8.0
2011	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2014	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2017	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(25%)	25%
Neutral	1(8%)	8%
Partial	4(33%)	33%
Won	4(33%)	33%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	62,166.67	7,770.838 cases	8
USD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2003	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2004	4 112	Lost: 1 cases (25.0%) Partial: 1 cases (25.0%) Won: 2 cases (50.0%)
2005	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 12 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Yong Thiam Look Peter v Singapore Medical Council: Appeal Against Suspension for Medical Misconduct 23 Jan 2017 YONG THIAM LOOK PETER (Applicant)Lost	23 Jan 2017	YONG THIAM LOOK PETER (Applicant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs fixed at $20,000 inclusive of reasonable disbursements. The court ordered that Dr. Yong’s suspension is to take effect from 1 February 2017.
2	Wartsila v Liu: Copyright Infringement & Discovery of Ship Drawings in AutoCAD Format 01 Jul 2014 Wartsila Ship Design Singapore Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Partial	01 Jul 2014	Wartsila Ship Design Singapore Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Order for re-tender of copies of drawings in native format grantedOrder for re-tender of copies of drawings in native format granted, but costs of compliance and application awarded to the defendants. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Re Joseph David QC: Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel for Complex International Arbitration Dispute 11 Dec 2011 Law Society of Singapore (Other)Neutral	11 Dec 2011	Law Society of Singapore (Other): NeutralThe Law Society of Singapore raised no objections in relation to the Applicant’s application and agreed that the legal issues in the various proceedings were of sufficient difficulty and complexity to warrant the exercise of judicial discretion in favour of the Applicant’s admission.
4	Liu Chee Ming v Loo-Lim Shirley: Strata Title Collective Sale Dispute 07 Jan 2008 Loo-Lim Shirley (Respondent)Won	07 Jan 2008	Loo-Lim Shirley (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the Strata Titles Board's decision was dismissed, upholding the approval of the collective sale.
5	RBG Resources plc v Credit Lyonnais: Foreign Company Liquidation & Creditor's Debt Claim 27 Oct 2005 RBG Resources plc (in liquidation) (Plaintiff, Respondent)Partial	27 Oct 2005	RBG Resources plc (in liquidation) (Plaintiff, Respondent): Application granted in partPayment Application granted, Transmission Application adjourned.
6	RBG Resources plc v Banque Cantonale Vaudoise: Application for Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel 28 Oct 2004 RBG Resources plc (Respondent, Appellant)Won	28 Oct 2004	RBG Resources plc (Respondent, Appellant): Successful ObjectionSuccessfully objected to the application for ad hoc admission of Mr. Henry Bernard Eder QC. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	RBG Resources plc v Banque Cantonale Vaudoise: Appeal Leave on Costs & Sale of Goods Act 10 Aug 2004 RBG Resources plc (in liquidation) (Plaintiff, Applicant)Lost	10 Aug 2004	RBG Resources plc (in liquidation) (Plaintiff, Applicant): Application dismissed with costsPlaintiff's application for leave to appeal was dismissed with costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	RBG Resources v Banque Cantonale: Costs & Interest on Conversion Claim 05 Aug 2004 RBG Resources plc (in liquidation) (Plaintiff)Won	05 Aug 2004	RBG Resources plc (in liquidation) (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the plaintiff on its claim for conversion and related costs. Currency assumed to be SGD, the currency of the jurisdiction.
9	RBG Resources plc v Banque Cantonale Vaudoise: Sale of Goods, Metal Transactions & Liquidator's Rights 10 Jun 2004 RBG Resources plc (in liquidation) (Plaintiff)Partial	10 Jun 2004	RBG Resources plc (in liquidation) (Plaintiff): Claim Allowed in PartRBG's claim was allowed, save for one drum of nickel. The sale proceeds of RBG’s metals are to be released to RBG or its solicitors, as RBG’s solicitors may direct. Damages to be paid to RBG for conversion of the nickel briquettes are the net purchase price or prices which CL has obtained for the same. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
10	Lim Yee Ming v Ubin Lagoon Resort: Stay of Execution Pending Appeal 25 Sep 2003 Lim Yee Ming (Appellant, Plaintiff)Lost	25 Sep 2003	Lim Yee Ming (Appellant, Plaintiff): Appeal DismissedPlaintiff's appeal against the decision to grant a stay of execution was dismissed.
11	Lim Yee Ming v Ubin Lagoon Resort: Negligence, Defective Equipment & Personal Injury 22 Jun 2003 Lim Yee Ming (Plaintiff)Won	22 Jun 2003	Lim Yee Ming (Plaintiff): Claim AllowedPlaintiff’s claim is allowed with costs. Damages payable to Ivy are as follows: (a) Pain and suffering $ 130,000.00 (b) Loss of Future Earnings (parties to work out the figures) (c) Future Medical Expenses (to be assessed) (d) Future nursing care (lump sum) $100,800.00 (agreed) (e) Wheel chair (lump sum) $ 12,600.00 (agreed) (f) Mattress (lump sum) $ 3,770.00 (agreed) (g) Commode etc (lump sum) $ 6,060.00 (agreed) (h) Special damages $ 82,544.97 (agreed) (i) Pre-trial earnings & CPF (to be assessed). The currency is assumed to be SGD, the currency of the jurisdiction.
12	KEA Holdings v Gan Boon Hock: Breach of Fiduciary Duty & Termination Dispute 13 Jan 2000 Gan Boon Hock (Defendant)Partial	13 Jan 2000	Gan Boon Hock (Defendant): Counterclaim allowed in partCounterclaim allowed in part. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the currency of the jurisdiction.