Priscilla Lua

Priscilla Lua is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2011 to 2015. The lawyer has handled 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in trademarks and trust law. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 50% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Priscilla Lua has demonstrated expertise across 21 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and company law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	4 cases	14% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 14% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	2 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	2 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	2 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Amendment of Pleadings	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Settlement Agreement	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Judicial Review	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Disciplinary Proceedings (University Staff)	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Alternative Pleadings	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Without Prejudice Rule	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Constitutional Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Priscilla Lua has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Priscilla Lua has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Drew & Napier LLC	4 cases	100% of cases	Tey Tsun Hang v National University of Singapore: Judicial Review of Dismissal(Jan 2015) Guy Neale v Nine Squares: Trust, Trade Marks & Ku De Ta Brand Dispute(Dec 2014) Neale v Nine Squares: Trust, Trade Marks & Partnership Dispute over 'KU DE TA' Brand(Nov 2013)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Priscilla Lua's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.5
Complex Cases: 2 (50%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	24.5 parties avg	4.5	50%
Won	24.5 parties avg	4.5	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2011	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2013	17.0 parties avg	7.0
2014	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(50%)	50%
Won	2(50%)	50%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.003 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2011	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Tey Tsun Hang v National University of Singapore: Judicial Review of Dismissal 13 Jan 2015 National University of Singapore (Respondent)Won	13 Jan 2015	National University of Singapore (Respondent): Application DismissedApplication for leave to bring judicial review proceedings dismissed.
2	Guy Neale v Nine Squares: Trust, Trade Marks & Ku De Ta Brand Dispute 21 Dec 2014 Nine Squares Pty Ltd (Respondent)Lost	21 Dec 2014	Nine Squares Pty Ltd (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; Singapore Marks held on trust for the Partnership.
3	Neale v Nine Squares: Trust, Trade Marks & Partnership Dispute over 'KU DE TA' Brand 17 Nov 2013 Nine Squares Pty Ltd (Defendant)Won	17 Nov 2013	Nine Squares Pty Ltd (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment for the Defendant; no monetary award. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Ng Chee Weng v Lim Jit Ming Bryan: Amendment of Statement of Claim & Alternative Pleading 17 Nov 2011 Lim Jit Ming Bryan (Respondent)Lost	17 Nov 2011	Lim Jit Ming Bryan (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; the respondent to pay half of the appellant's costs of the present appeal. There will be no order as to costs with regard to the proceedings before the Judge and the AR. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.