Paul Seah

Paul Seah is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2006 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 13 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in conflict of laws and civil practice. Their track record shows a 31.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 6 complex cases, representing 46% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Paul Seah has demonstrated expertise across 64 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and company law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	8 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice39% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 8 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Company Law	7 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	5 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced54% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced71% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice31% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice21% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Conflict of Laws	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Natural forum	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Paul Seah 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 Practice40% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice23% relevance score	Paul Seah 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	Experienced60% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Torts	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Paul Seah 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 Specialized90% relevance score	Paul Seah 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	Experienced65% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Lis alibi pendens	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Paul Seah 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 Specialized95% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Derivative action	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Comity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Abuse of Process	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Foreign Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Further and better particulars	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Service of document out of jurisdiction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Paul Seah 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	Experienced50% relevance score	Paul Seah 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 Specialized90% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Debt Recovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Forum conveniens	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Shareholders Agreement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty to Account	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Interpretation of contractual terms	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contractual Interpretation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Negative Covenant	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Interpretation of Contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mareva Injunction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Foreign Judgments	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Interpretation of Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Locus Standi	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Financial Crisis	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Club Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Investment Portfolio	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Minority Shareholders Rights	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Proper Plaintiff Rule	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fraud on the Minority	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin 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	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Paul Seah 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 Practice20% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Dispute Resolution	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Forum Non Conveniens	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Investments	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Pleadings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Private International Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Minority Oppression	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Anti-suit injunction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Paul Seah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Paul Seah has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 13 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Tan Kok Quan Partnership	13 cases	100% of cases	Oro Negro Drilling v Integradora: Injunction for Breach of Negative Covenant in Restructuring Proceedings(Oct 2023) Lim Siew Soo v Sembawang Engineers: Priority of Costs in Company Winding Up(Feb 2021) Arovin Ltd v Hadiran Sridjaja: Document Production, Relevance, and Legal Privilege(Sep 2019)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Paul Seah's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.8
Complex Cases: 6 (46%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	83.8 parties avg	3.8	62%
Partial	13.0 parties avg	3.0	8%
Won	44.2 parties avg	4.2	31%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2006	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2007	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2009	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2013	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2016	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2017	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2018	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2019	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2021	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2023	19.0 parties avg	9.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	8(62%)	62%
Partial	1(8%)	8%
Won	4(31%)	31%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	2,040,301.00	226,700.119 cases	9

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2006	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2007	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2016	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2021	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 13 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Oro Negro Drilling v Integradora: Injunction for Breach of Negative Covenant in Restructuring Proceedings 22 Oct 2023 Gonzalo Gil White (Defendant)Lost	22 Oct 2023	Gonzalo Gil White (Defendant): Judgment against DefendantJudgment against the Defendant; damages to be assessed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Lim Siew Soo v Sembawang Engineers: Priority of Costs in Company Winding Up 09 Feb 2021 Sembawang Engineers and Constructors Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) (Defendant)Lost	09 Feb 2021	Sembawang Engineers and Constructors Pte Ltd (in compulsory liquidation) (Defendant): LostThe court ruled against the defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Arovin Ltd v Hadiran Sridjaja: Document Production, Relevance, and Legal Privilege 09 Sep 2019 Vijay Goradia (Plaintiff)Partial	09 Sep 2019	Vijay Goradia (Plaintiff): PartialThe court ordered production of documents relating to the sharing of liabilities arising out of any guarantee and/or exit option demanded by EDBI in respect of the Initial PCOA, but declined to order production in respect of Request 11 and Request 12. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Arovin Ltd v Hadiran Sridjaja: Dispute over Pleadings and Requests for Further and Better Particulars 11 Nov 2018 Vijay Goradia (Plaintiff)Won	11 Nov 2018	Vijay Goradia (Plaintiff): Application grantedThe defendant shall pay the plaintiffs’ costs of the application, assessed at S$3,000 plus reasonable disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Rappo v Accent Delight: Forum Non Conveniens, Stay of Proceedings & Conflict of Laws 17 Apr 2017 Tania Rappo (Appellant, Applicant, Defendant)Won	17 Apr 2017	Tania Rappo (Appellant, Applicant, Defendant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed and stay of proceedings granted.
6	Accent Delight v Bouvier: Forum Non Conveniens & Conflict of Laws 16 Mar 2016 Tania Rappo (Defendant)Lost	16 Mar 2016	Tania Rappo (Defendant): Summons dismissedSummons filed by the defendant was dismissed. Costs to the plaintiffs to be taxed unless otherwise agreed. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Koh Sin Chong v Singapore Swimming Club: Indemnity Resolution & Defamation 30 Dec 2014 Koh Sin Chong Freddie (Plaintiff)Lost	30 Dec 2014	Koh Sin Chong Freddie (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedPlaintiff's claim for indemnity is dismissed.
8	Sharikat Logistics v Ong Boon Chuan: Minority Oppression & Shareholder Dispute 04 Nov 2014 Sharikat Logistics Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	04 Nov 2014	Sharikat Logistics Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Claim AllowedTGDPL shall forthwith purchase Sharikat’s shares in the Company at the price of $2,034,300 less the outstanding amount owed to the Company (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
9	Thomas Teddy v Kuiper International: Tort of Conversion & Damages 09 Jan 2013 Kuiper International Pte Ltd (Respondent)Lost	09 Jan 2013	Kuiper International Pte Ltd (Respondent): Liable for tort of conversionLiable for tort of conversion of the File Server from 2 to 7 September 2012 and ordered to pay nominal damages of $1.00 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
10	Go Dante Yap v Bank Austria: Investment Losses & Advisory Duty Dispute 07 Aug 2011 Go Dante Yap (Appellant)Lost	07 Aug 2011	Go Dante Yap (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; Appellant to pay 90% of the Respondent's costs of the appeal. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
11	Fustar Chemicals Ltd v Liquidator of Fustar Chemicals Pte Ltd: Proof of Debt in Members' Voluntary Winding Up 29 Jul 2009 Liquidator of Fustar Chemicals Pte Ltd (Respondent)Lost	29 Jul 2009	Liquidator of Fustar Chemicals Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal dismissedAppeal dismissed; OSH directed to accept FCL’s proof of debt, inclusive of interest at the rate of 3% per annum which is to be calculated on the basis it commences 3 months after the date the proof of debt was lodged with the Company. The appellant will be entitled to costs here and below, with the usual consequential orders. OSH’s costs and disbursements in relation and incidental to FCL’s proof of debt were not properly incurred and she is entitled to be paid her costs and disbursements from the assets of the Company only after all the Company’s creditors have been paid. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
12	Ting Sing Ning v Ting Chek Swee: Derivative Action, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Fraud on Minority Exception 08 Oct 2007 Ting Sing Ning (alias Malcolm Ding) (Appellant)Won	08 Oct 2007	Ting Sing Ning (alias Malcolm Ding) (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe appellant's appeal was allowed, granting him the right to pursue the derivative action.
13	Ting Sing Ning v Ting Chek Swee: Locus Standi in Shareholder Fraud Claim 26 Oct 2006 Ting Sing Ning (alias Malcolm Ding) (Plaintiff)Lost	26 Oct 2006	Ting Sing Ning (alias Malcolm Ding) (Plaintiff): Action DismissedThe plaintiff's action was dismissed with costs to follow the event and to be taxed if not agreed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.