Peter Ezekiel

Peter Ezekiel is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2003 to 2011. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 5 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in negligence and contract law. Their track record shows a 25.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 13% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated expertise across 29 primary practice areas, with significant experience in property law and negligence.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Property Law	3 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Negligence	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	3 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice44% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized81% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Division of Assets	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Child Custody	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Automobile Accidents	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Maintenance	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Road Traffic Act	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Guarantee	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel 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	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Child Support	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Divorce	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Landlord and Tenant Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Inducement of Breach of Contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Peter Ezekiel has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Peter Ezekiel has been affiliated with 5 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Peter Ezekiel & Co	4 cases	50% of cases	APK v APL: Application for Variation of Ancillary Orders Regarding Matrimonial Assets and Child Custody(Nov 2011) APK v APL: Extension of Time to Appeal Ancillary Orders in Divorce Proceedings(Mar 2011) Tan Yee Zhen v Yeo Cheng Khoy: Negligence Claim for Pedestrian Road Accident(Jul 2010)
K S Chia Gurdeep & Param	1 cases	13% of cases	Mohit Singh v Sim Han Khoon: Negligence and Liability in Car Accident(Dec 2009)
Phoeng & Co	1 cases	13% of cases	Kiew Ah Cheng David v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against High Court's Dismissal of Criminal Motion(Jan 2007)
Edwin Tay and Co	1 cases	13% of cases	Koh Keow Neo v Chee Johnny: Privatisation of HUDC Estate Dispute(May 2004)
Edwin Tay & Co	1 cases	13% of cases	Nop Wen Xuan v Leong Hwa Chan Si: Parol Evidence Rule & Privity of Contract(Dec 2003)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Peter Ezekiel's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.4
Complex Cases: 1 (13%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	53.8 parties avg	3.8	63%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	13%
Won	23.0 parties avg	3.0	25%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2003	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2004	111.0 parties avg	11.0
2007	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2010	22.7 parties avg	2.7
2011	22.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	5(63%)	63%
Partial	1(13%)	13%
Won	2(25%)	25%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.004 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2003	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2004	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2007	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Partial: 1 cases (50.0%)
2011	2 2	Lost: 2 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	APK v APL: Application for Variation of Ancillary Orders Regarding Matrimonial Assets and Child Custody 27 Nov 2011 APL (Applicant, Defendant)Lost	27 Nov 2011	APL (Applicant, Defendant): Application dismissedThe applicant's application for a variation of the ancillary orders was dismissed with costs.
2	APK v APL: Extension of Time to Appeal Ancillary Orders in Divorce Proceedings 24 Mar 2011 APK (Defendant, Applicant)Lost	24 Mar 2011	APK (Defendant, Applicant): Application dismissedThe Defendant's application for an extension of time to file a Notice of Appeal against the ancillary orders was dismissed.
3	Tan Yee Zhen v Yeo Cheng Khoy: Negligence Claim for Pedestrian Road Accident 22 Jul 2010 Tan Yee Zhen (by his litigation representative Tan Seow Thiang) (Plaintiff)Partial	22 Jul 2010	Tan Yee Zhen (by his litigation representative Tan Seow Thiang) (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; liability apportioned 80% to the Defendant and 20% to the Plaintiff. Damages are to be assessed by the registrar. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	HSBCIT v Elchemi Assets: Lease Agreement Dispute over Property Rental Arrears and Guarantee Enforcement 02 Mar 2010 Ang Chee Seng (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	02 Mar 2010	Ang Chee Seng (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed against the defendant. The judgment does not specify a currency, so the currency of the jurisdiction (Singapore) is assumed.
5	Mohit Singh v Sim Han Khoon: Negligence and Liability in Car Accident 03 Dec 2009 Sim Han Khoon (Respondent, Plaintiff)Won	03 Dec 2009	Sim Han Khoon (Respondent, Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff, the appeal was dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Kiew Ah Cheng David v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against High Court's Dismissal of Criminal Motion 16 Jan 2007 Kiew Ah Cheng David (Appellant)Lost	16 Jan 2007	Kiew Ah Cheng David (Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe appellant's appeal was dismissed due to the court lacking jurisdiction.
7	Koh Keow Neo v Chee Johnny: Privatisation of HUDC Estate Dispute 05 May 2004 Koh Keow Neo (Plaintiff)Lost	05 May 2004	Koh Keow Neo (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedClaim dismissed with costs to the defendants. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Nop Wen Xuan v Leong Hwa Chan Si: Parol Evidence Rule & Privity of Contract 01 Dec 2003 Chia Eng Soon (Defendant)Won	01 Dec 2003	Chia Eng Soon (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment in favour of the defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.