Peter Fernando

Peter Fernando is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2018. The lawyer has handled 10 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and misuse of drugs act. Their track record shows a 10.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Peter Fernando has demonstrated expertise across 26 primary practice areas, with significant experience in criminal law and misuse of drugs act.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Criminal Law	9 cases	16% of total caseload	Highly Specialized82% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 9 cases which represents 16% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	8 cases	15% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 15% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	6 cases	11% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	4 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Evidence	3 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice47% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Theft	3 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice17% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Drug Trafficking	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Offences	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal conspiracy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Importation of Drugs	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Retraction of Plea	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mitigation Plea	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Illegal importation of controlled drugs	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Drug Offences	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Morbid Jealousy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Possession for purpose of trafficking	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Revision	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Peter Fernando 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 Practice25% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Statutory offences	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Diminished Responsibility	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Mental Capacity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Peter Fernando has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Peter Fernando has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 9 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Leo Fernando	9 cases	90% of cases	Dinesh s/o Rajantheran v Public Prosecutor: Retraction of Guilty Plea and Section 228(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code(Nov 2018) Public Prosecutor v G Krishnasamy Naidu: Murder, Diminished Responsibility & Delusional Disorder(Apr 2006) Shanmugam v PP: Importation of Cannabis and Knowledge of Drug Possession(Jan 2005)
Leo Fernando & Partners	1 cases	10% of cases	Yeoh Aik Wei v PP: Import of Diamorphine & Presumption of Knowledge(Feb 2003)

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.3
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	92.3 parties avg	2.3	90%
Won	12.0 parties avg	2.0	10%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	42.8 parties avg	2.8
2001	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2003	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2004	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2005	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2018	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	9(90%)	90%
Won	1(10%)	10%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	4 4	Lost: 4 cases (100.0%)
2001	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2003	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2004	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 10 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Dinesh s/o Rajantheran v Public Prosecutor: Retraction of Guilty Plea and Section 228(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code 22 Nov 2018 Dinesh S/O Rajantheran (Applicant)Won	22 Nov 2018	Dinesh S/O Rajantheran (Applicant): Appeal AllowedConviction set aside and case sent back to the State Courts for trial.
2	Public Prosecutor v G Krishnasamy Naidu: Murder, Diminished Responsibility & Delusional Disorder 25 Apr 2006 G Krishnasamy Naidu (Defendant)Lost	25 Apr 2006	G Krishnasamy Naidu (Defendant): Convicted of MurderDefence of diminished responsibility rejected; accused convicted of murder. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Shanmugam v PP: Importation of Cannabis and Knowledge of Drug Possession 13 Jan 2005 Shanmugam s/o Murugesu (Appellant)Lost	13 Jan 2005	Shanmugam s/o Murugesu (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal against conviction and sentence of death for importing cannabis was dismissed.
4	Raman Selvam v PP: Conviction for Drug Trafficking under Misuse of Drugs Act Upheld 08 Jan 2004 Raman Selvam s/o Renganathan (Appellant)Lost	08 Jan 2004	Raman Selvam s/o Renganathan (Appellant): Appeal dismissedAppeal against conviction and sentence dismissed.
5	Yeoh Aik Wei v PP: Import of Diamorphine & Presumption of Knowledge 05 Feb 2003 Yeoh Aik Wei (Appellant)Lost	05 Feb 2003	Yeoh Aik Wei (Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against conviction for unauthorized import of diamorphine was dismissed.
6	Goh Chye Soon Jimmy v PP: Trafficking of Diamorphine & Possession of Controlled Drugs 22 Apr 2001 Goh Chye Soon Jimmy (Appellant)Lost	22 Apr 2001	Goh Chye Soon Jimmy (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal against conviction for drug trafficking was dismissed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	Public Prosecutor v Tan Tiew Guay & Chow Mun Fai: Drug Trafficking & Possession 28 Nov 2000 Tan Tiew Guay (Defendant)Lost	28 Nov 2000	Tan Tiew Guay (Defendant): Guilty of PossessionFound guilty of possession of 5.29g of heroin and sentenced to 8 months imprisonment.
8	Lim Beng Soon v PP: Drug Trafficking, Possession, and Mens Rea under the Misuse of Drugs Act 17 Sep 2000 Lim Beng Soon (Appellant)Lost	17 Sep 2000	Lim Beng Soon (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal against conviction for drug trafficking was dismissed.
9	Public Prosecutor v Lim Beng Soon: Trafficking in Controlled Drugs 09 May 2000 Lim Beng Soon (Defendant)Lost	09 May 2000	Lim Beng Soon (Defendant): GuiltyFound guilty of trafficking in a controlled drug.
10	PP v Sharom bin Ahmad: Trafficking Diamorphine & Criminal Conspiracy 13 Apr 2000 Boksenang bin Bochek (Defendant)Lost	13 Apr 2000	Boksenang bin Bochek (Defendant): Guilty verdictBoksenang bin Bochek was found guilty on the amended charge.