Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik

Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2023 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil procedure and summary judgement. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated expertise across 12 primary practice areas, with significant experience in loan agreement and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Loan Agreement	2 cases	13% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	13% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	2 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Amendments	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Trident Law Corporation	3 cases	100% of cases	Lee Wee Ching v Wang Piao: Appealability of Summary Judgment Under Rules of Court 2021(Mar 2024) Wang Piao v Lee Wee Ching: Summary Judgment Appeal for US$1.95M Loan Dispute(Oct 2023) Wang Piao v Lee Wee Ching: Amendment of Defence Post-Summary Judgment(Aug 2023)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.0
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	22.0 parties avg	2.0	67%
Won	12.0 parties avg	2.0	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2023	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2024	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Mohamad Hasbu Haneef bin Abdul Malik's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(67%)	67%
Won	1(33%)	33%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	13,000.00	13,000.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2023	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Lee Wee Ching v Wang Piao: Appealability of Summary Judgment Under Rules of Court 2021 24 Mar 2024 Lee Wee Ching (Appellant)Won	24 Mar 2024	Lee Wee Ching (Appellant): Application DismissedApplication to strike out the appeal was dismissed, and Mr. Wang was ordered to pay Mr. Lee the costs of the application fixed at $13,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Wang Piao v Lee Wee Ching: Summary Judgment Appeal for US$1.95M Loan Dispute 02 Oct 2023 Lee Wee Ching (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	02 Oct 2023	Lee Wee Ching (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal DismissedDefendant's appeal against the summary judgment was dismissed.
3	Wang Piao v Lee Wee Ching: Amendment of Defence Post-Summary Judgment 03 Aug 2023 Lee Wee Ching (Defendant)Lost	03 Aug 2023	Lee Wee Ching (Defendant): Application dismissedThe defendant's application to amend his defence was dismissed.