Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim

Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2020 to 2025. The lawyer has handled 7 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in insolvency law and restructuring and dissolution. Their track record shows a 14.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 3 complex cases, representing 43% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated expertise across 39 primary practice areas, with significant experience in insolvency law and contract law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Insolvency Law	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Company Law	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Dissolution	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Mareva Injunctions	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Schemes of Arrangement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trusts and Estates	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Wills and Probate	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Estate Administration	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Non est factum	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Receivership	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Moratorium	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Construction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Contempt	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligent misrepresentation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fraudulent misrepresentation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Companies Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Liquidation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Director's Disqualification	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Monetary Judgments	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Impecunious judgment debtor	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Forbearance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Insolvency	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Judicial Management	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 6 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Eldan Law LLP	6 cases	86% of cases	Che’som Binti Abdullah v Qurratu Ain Binti Mohamed Yusope: Undue Influence in Property Transfer Dispute(Jan 2025) Re Logistics Construction: Judicial Management, Competing Nominations for Interim Judicial Manager(Mar 2024) CoShield Global v Krittapaj Sorralump: Civil Contempt & Impecunious Judgment Debtor(Nov 2023)
Tan Kok Quan Partnership	1 cases	14% of cases	Kardachi v Attorney-General: Director Disqualification under Section 155A Companies Act(Sep 2020)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 5.4
Complex Cases: 3 (43%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	54.7 parties avg	4.7	71%
Neutral	114.0 parties avg	14.0	14%
Won	12.0 parties avg	2.0	14%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2020	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	45.2 parties avg	5.2
2024	114.0 parties avg	14.0
2025	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Muhammad Imran Bin Abdul Rahim's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	5(71%)	71%
Neutral	1(14%)	14%
Won	1(14%)	14%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	2,624,070.60	874,690.203 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2020	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	4 211	Lost: 2 cases (50.0%) Neutral: 1 cases (25.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2024	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2025	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 7 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Che’som Binti Abdullah v Qurratu Ain Binti Mohamed Yusope: Undue Influence in Property Transfer Dispute 16 Jan 2025 Che’som Binti Abdullah (Claimant)Lost	16 Jan 2025	Che’som Binti Abdullah (Claimant): Claim DismissedMdm Che’som’s claim to set aside or rescind the Transfer and to rectify the land register by removing Mdm Ain as a joint tenant was dismissed.
2	Re Logistics Construction: Judicial Management, Competing Nominations for Interim Judicial Manager 03 Mar 2024 Buildforms Construction (Pte) Ltd (Other)Lost	03 Mar 2024	Buildforms Construction (Pte) Ltd (Other): Nomination RejectedBuildforms' nomination of judicial manager rejected.
3	CoShield Global v Krittapaj Sorralump: Civil Contempt & Impecunious Judgment Debtor 07 Nov 2023 CoShield NZ Limited (Applicant)Lost	07 Nov 2023	CoShield NZ Limited (Applicant): Application DismissedApplication for committal against the defendant was dismissed.
4	Majestica Enterprises v Kams Singapore: Creditor Funding in Winding Up under IRDA 06 Sep 2023 Kams Singapore Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) (Respondent)Lost	06 Sep 2023	Kams Singapore Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) (Respondent): Application grantedThe application for an order pursuant to s 204(3) of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 was granted.
5	Logistics Construction Pte Ltd Scheme of Arrangement: Moratorium Application 17 Aug 2023 Buildforms Construction (Pte) Ltd (Respondent)Neutral	17 Aug 2023	Buildforms Construction (Pte) Ltd (Respondent): Objection notedBuildforms Construction (Pte) Ltd objected to the moratorium application.
6	Bay Lim Piang v Lye Cher Kang: Fraudulent Misrepresentation & Loan Recission 18 Jan 2023 Bay Lim Piang (Plaintiff)Won	18 Jan 2023	Bay Lim Piang (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; damages awarded in the amount of $2,604,070.60 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	Kardachi v Attorney-General: Director Disqualification under Section 155A Companies Act 21 Sep 2020 Jason Aleksander Kardachi (Appellant, Applicant)Lost	21 Sep 2020	Jason Aleksander Kardachi (Appellant, Applicant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; ordered to pay costs of $20,000 inclusive of disbursements (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).