Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan

Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2018 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 11 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 4 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and fiduciary duties. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 6 complex cases, representing 55% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated expertise across 51 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	8 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 8 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	8 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced61% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	5 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	4 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Costs	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice49% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan 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	Highly Specialized79% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appeal	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice17% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Recourse against award	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mental Capacity Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Setting aside	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Rescission	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fraudulent misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Enforcement of Order	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Non-compliance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mareva Injunction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Incomplete Gifts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Adducing fresh evidence on appeal	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Investment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Investment Schemes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Ponzi Scheme	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Relationship Manager	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan 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	Experienced60% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Pleadings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan 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 Practice30% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Gifts Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Ponzi Schemes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan 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

Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan has been affiliated with 4 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 7 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
LVM Law Chambers LLC	7 cases	64% of cases	Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet: Appeal on Costs Decision and Requirements for Permission to Appeal(Nov 2023) CYE v CYF: Setting Aside Arbitration Award for Energy Trading Dispute(Sep 2023) WDT v WDS: Appeal on Incomplete Gift & Admissibility of Fresh Evidence(Feb 2023)
Tan Kok Quan Partnership	2 cases	18% of cases	Pradeepto Kumar Biswas v Sabyasachi Mukherjee: Appeal Struck Out for Non-Compliance with Rules of Court(Nov 2019) Mukherjee v. Biswas: Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Tort of Deceit, Investments, Banking Relationship Manager(Dec 2018)
LVM Law Chambers	1 cases	9% of cases	Ho Soo Tong v Ho Soo Fong: Dispute Over Invest Ho Properties Pte Ltd Share Ownership(Apr 2023)
Tan Kok Quan Partnership LLP	1 cases	9% of cases	BLL v BLM: Issue Estoppel & Res Judicata in Mental Capacity Case(Sep 2019)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.1
Complex Cases: 6 (55%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	33.0 parties avg	3.0	27%
Neutral	33.7 parties avg	3.7	27%
Partial	24.3 parties avg	4.3	18%
Won	44.7 parties avg	4.7	36%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2018	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2019	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2020	44.4 parties avg	4.4
2023	44.5 parties avg	4.5

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Muk Chen Yeen Jonathan'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	3(25%)	25%
Partial	2(17%)	17%
Won	4(33%)	33%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	80,000.00	20,000.004 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2018	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2020	5 122	Lost: 1 cases (20.0%) Neutral: 2 cases (40.0%) Won: 2 cases (40.0%)
2023	4 211	Lost: 2 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (25.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 11 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet: Appeal on Costs Decision and Requirements for Permission to Appeal 16 Nov 2023 Chan Pik Sun (Applicant)Partial	16 Nov 2023	Chan Pik Sun (Applicant): Permission to appeal the Costs Decision grantedThe court granted the applicant permission to appeal the Costs Decision.
2	CYE v CYF: Setting Aside Arbitration Award for Energy Trading Dispute 28 Sep 2023 CYE (Claimant)Lost	28 Sep 2023	CYE (Claimant): Application DismissedClaimant's application to set aside the Final Award is dismissed.
3	Ho Soo Tong v Ho Soo Fong: Dispute Over Invest Ho Properties Pte Ltd Share Ownership 05 Apr 2023 Ho Liew Leng @Edwin (Plaintiff)Won	05 Apr 2023	Ho Liew Leng @Edwin (Plaintiff): Claim AllowedThe court found that an express trust existed in favor of the Plaintiff, such that the Defendants hold on trust for the Plaintiff 416,666.67 shares in Invest Ho.
4	WDT v WDS: Appeal on Incomplete Gift & Admissibility of Fresh Evidence 05 Feb 2023 WDT (Appellant, Defendant, Applicant)Lost	05 Feb 2023	WDT (Appellant, Defendant, Applicant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs of $25,000, inclusive of disbursements, awarded to the respondent.
5	Goh Seng Heng v Wang Xiaopu: Appeal on Repayment of Sales Proceeds & Security for Costs 08 Jul 2020 Dr Goh Seng Heng (Appellant, Defendant, Plaintiff in Counterclaim)Neutral	08 Jul 2020	Dr Goh Seng Heng (Appellant, Defendant, Plaintiff in Counterclaim): Appeal papers deemed filed and servedThe time required for the filing of the appellant’s appeal papers as stipulated in the Rules of Court is extended to today and the said appeal papers filed on 23 March 2020 are deemed filed and served today.
6	Chan Pik Sun v Wan Hoe Keet: Mareva Injunction in Investment Scheme Dispute 02 Jul 2020 Chan Pik Sun (Plaintiff)Lost	02 Jul 2020	Chan Pik Sun (Plaintiff): Application DismissedThe plaintiff's application for a Mareva injunction was dismissed.
7	LVM Law Chambers LLC v Wan Hoe Keet: Conflict of Interest & Legal Representation 02 Apr 2020 Chan Pik Sun (Other)Neutral	02 Apr 2020	Chan Pik Sun (Other): NeutralThe outcome for Ms. Chan is neutral in this appeal, as the court allowed her lawyers to continue representing her. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Liberty Sky Investments v Aesthetic Medical Partners: Fraudulent Misrepresentation & Contract Rescission 09 Feb 2020 Dr Goh Seng Heng (Defendant, Respondent, Appellant)Won	09 Feb 2020	Dr Goh Seng Heng (Defendant, Respondent, Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed. No monetary amount awarded. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	Pradeepto Kumar Biswas v Sabyasachi Mukherjee: Appeal Struck Out for Non-Compliance with Rules of Court 28 Nov 2019 Gouri Mukherjee (Applicants, Respondents)Won	28 Nov 2019	Gouri Mukherjee (Applicants, Respondents): Appeal Struck OutAppeal struck out and costs of $15,000 (all-in) were awarded to the respondents. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
10	BLL v BLM: Issue Estoppel & Res Judicata in Mental Capacity Case 09 Sep 2019 BLL (Plaintiff)Neutral	09 Sep 2019	BLL (Plaintiff): Allowed relitigation of undue influence issueThe court allowed the defendants to relitigate the issue of undue influence.
11	Mukherjee v. Biswas: Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Tort of Deceit, Investments, Banking Relationship Manager 10 Dec 2018 Gouri Mukherjee (Plaintiff, Defendant)Partial	10 Dec 2018	Gouri Mukherjee (Plaintiff, Defendant): Partial Judgment for Plaintiff, Claim DismissedJudgment for the plaintiff in part; damages awarded. Claim against the defendant dismissed. (Currency assumed to be SGD, the currency of Singapore, as the judgment originates from Singapore.)