Melvin See

Melvin See is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2003 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 15 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 4 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in performance bond and breach of contract. Their track record shows a 20.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 4 complex cases, representing 27% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Melvin See has demonstrated expertise across 74 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and arbitration.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	9 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice34% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 9 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	6 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced61% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Company Law	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced69% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Performance Bond	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized92% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Melvin See 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	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Melvin See 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 Specialized78% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Shareholders Agreement	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice14% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Shares	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Limitation	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Dissolution	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estate Administration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Arbitration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contempt of Court	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Melvin See 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 Specialized80% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Abuse of Process	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Discovery of documents	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Quantum meruit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Failure of consideration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Garnishee Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Melvin See 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	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Medical Negligence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Defamation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Assessment of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Guarantee	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Crossclaims	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Succession Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Matrimonial Property	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets Division	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duty	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Family Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estate Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Property	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Inherent Power of the Court	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Market Manipulation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Window Dressing	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Portfolio Pumping	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Melvin See 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	General Practice10% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Construction Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Divorce	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Financial Services Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Liposuction Malpractice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Melvin See 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 Practice10% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Medical Malpractice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Securities Fraud	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trusts and Estates	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wills and Probate	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wrongful Death	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Melvin See has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Melvin See 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

Melvin See has been affiliated with 4 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 8 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Wong Partnership	8 cases	53% of cases	Lim Ah Neu v Tan Tiow Jin: Breach of Contract for Sale of Shares in Family Company(Jun 2007) Econ Piling v Aviva: Performance Bond Call Validity After Time-Barred Contract Claims(Sep 2006) Econ Piling v Aviva & JTC: Performance Bond Call After Limitation Period(May 2006)
Rodyk & Davidson LLP	4 cases	27% of cases	BS Mount Sophia v Join-Aim: Interim Injunction & Unconscionable Call on Performance Bond(May 2012) Woodcliff Assets v Reflexology: Minority Oppression & Winding Up Dispute(Oct 2010) Monetary Authority of Singapore v Tan Chong Koay: Market Rigging & False Trading in UET Shares(Sep 2010)
Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP	2 cases	13% of cases	JTrust Asia v Group Lease Holdings: Winding Up Application for Inability to Pay Debts(Jul 2024) Zhu Xiu Chun v Rockwills Trustee: Negligence, Liposuction, Damages for Loss of Inheritance(Aug 2016)
WongPartnership	1 cases	7% of cases	Teck Jin v Tan Kim Seng: Trust, Shares, and Company Disputes(Sep 2007)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Melvin See's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 12.7
Complex Cases: 4 (27%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	915.2 parties avg	15.2	60%
Neutral	22.5 parties avg	2.5	13%
Partial	14.0 parties avg	4.0	7%
Won	32.3 parties avg	2.3	20%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2003	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2004	218.3 parties avg	18.3
2005	218.2 parties avg	18.2
2006	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2007	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2008	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2010	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2012	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2024	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	9(60%)	60%
Neutral	2(13%)	13%
Partial	1(7%)	7%
Won	3(20%)	20%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	254,000.00	23,090.9111 cases	11

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2003	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2004	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2005	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2006	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2007	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2008	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2012	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 15 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	JTrust Asia v Group Lease Holdings: Winding Up Application for Inability to Pay Debts 25 Jul 2024 Group Lease Holdings Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	25 Jul 2024	Group Lease Holdings Pte Ltd (Defendant): Winding up order grantedOrdered that Group Lease Holdings Pte Ltd be wound up. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Zhu Xiu Chun v Rockwills Trustee: Negligence, Liposuction, Damages for Loss of Inheritance 31 Aug 2016 Wong Meng Hang (Huang Minghan) (Respondent, Appellant)Partial	31 Aug 2016	Wong Meng Hang (Huang Minghan) (Respondent, Appellant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part by reducing the sum awarded for the Children’s loss of inheritance claim. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	BS Mount Sophia v Join-Aim: Interim Injunction & Unconscionable Call on Performance Bond 08 May 2012 BS Mount Sophia Pte Ltd (Appellant)Lost	08 May 2012	BS Mount Sophia Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs. The court found a strong prima facie case of unconscionability justifying the continuance of the injunction restraining the Appellant’s call on the Bond pending arbitration. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Woodcliff Assets v Reflexology: Minority Oppression & Winding Up Dispute 24 Oct 2010 Woodcliff Assets Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	24 Oct 2010	Woodcliff Assets Ltd (Plaintiff): Application to amend dismissedThe Plaintiff's application to amend its statement of claim to include a cause of action for minority oppression was dismissed.
5	Monetary Authority of Singapore v Tan Chong Koay: Market Rigging & False Trading in UET Shares 16 Sep 2010 Pheim Asset Management Sdn Bhd (Defendant)Lost	16 Sep 2010	Pheim Asset Management Sdn Bhd (Defendant): Civil Penalty ImposedCivil penalty of $250,000 imposed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Yaku Shin v Panasonic: Quantum Meruit & Contractual Obligations in Supply Chain Dispute 05 Jun 2008 Panasonic AVC Networks Singapore Pte Ltd (Defendant)Neutral	05 Jun 2008	Panasonic AVC Networks Singapore Pte Ltd (Defendant): Counterclaim DismissedCounterclaim dismissed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	Teck Jin v Tan Kim Seng: Trust, Shares, and Company Disputes 16 Sep 2007 Teck Jin (Pte) Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	16 Sep 2007	Teck Jin (Pte) Ltd (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the plaintiff; the defendant is to deliver up 753,314 shares of S$1 each in the capital of SR Holdings to the plaintiff and the plaintiff is to pay the defendant for the rights issue shares, less dividends received by the defendant from Solid Resources and attributable to the plaintiff’s shares. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Lim Ah Neu v Tan Tiow Jin: Breach of Contract for Sale of Shares in Family Company 25 Jun 2007 Tan Tiow Jin (Defendant)Lost	25 Jun 2007	Tan Tiow Jin (Defendant): Claim DismissedThe plaintiff's claim was successful, resulting in a loss for the defendant.
9	Econ Piling v Aviva: Performance Bond Call Validity After Time-Barred Contract Claims 11 Sep 2006 Jurong Town Corporation (Respondent)Lost	11 Sep 2006	Jurong Town Corporation (Respondent): Appeal DismissedJTC's appeal was dismissed, and they were restrained from calling on the performance bond.
10	Econ Piling v Aviva & JTC: Performance Bond Call After Limitation Period 07 May 2006 Jurong Town Corporation (Defendant)Won	07 May 2006	Jurong Town Corporation (Defendant): Appeal AllowedThe appeal was allowed, setting aside the injunction order that restrained Aviva General Insurance Pte Ltd from making payment under the performance bond.
11	Tan Chor Chuan v Tan Yeow Hiang: Defamation, Fair Comment, and Qualified Privilege in Chess Federation Dispute 27 Sep 2005 Tan Lian Seng (Plaintiff)Lost	27 Sep 2005	Tan Lian Seng (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedClaim dismissed as the court granted judgment in favor of the defendants.
12	Bovis Lend Lease v Jay-Tech Marine: Ad Hoc Arbitration & Appointing Authority Dispute 05 May 2005 Bovis Lend Lease Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant)Won	05 May 2005	Bovis Lend Lease Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant): Declarations made in favour of Bovis Lend Lease Pte LtdDeclarations made in favour of Bovis Lend Lease Pte Ltd. Costs awarded against Jay-Tech Marine fixed at $4,000 inclusive of disbursements (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
13	Tan Chor Chuan v Tan Yeow Hiang: Striking Out Defence for Breach of Discovery Obligations 16 Nov 2004 Tan Lian Seng (Plaintiff)Lost	16 Nov 2004	Tan Lian Seng (Plaintiff): Application DismissedApplication to strike out the defence was dismissed with costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
14	Mitsui v Easton Graham Rush: Injunction Against Arbitrator & Court's Power 15 Feb 2004 Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	15 Feb 2004	Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co Ltd (Plaintiff): Application dismissedPlaintiff's application for an injunction was dismissed with costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
15	Kiyue v Aquagen: Derivative Action & Arbitration - Interpretation of 'Action' under Companies Act 17 Jul 2003 Aquagen International Pte Ltd (Respondent)Neutral	17 Jul 2003	Aquagen International Pte Ltd (Respondent): NeutralThe company was the respondent in the application. The outcome of the application did not directly affect the company's position in the underlying arbitration.