Salem Ibrahim

Salem Ibrahim is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2005 to 2022. The lawyer has handled 10 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in family law and breach of contract. Their track record shows a 42.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 3 complex cases, representing 30% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated expertise across 52 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	7 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced59% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	6 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	4 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	3 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Family Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice49% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Litigation	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contractual terms	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Natural forum	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Restraint of foreign proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Comity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Illegality and public policy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contempt of Court	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Contempt	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Director's Duties	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Equity and limitation of actions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Extension of Time	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Formation of contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Discharge	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Quantum meruit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Garnishee Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Trust	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mistake	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Affidavits	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets Division	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Loans	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Court Order	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Inherent Power of the Court	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Anton Piller Orders	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Governance Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Implied contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Romantic Relationship	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Distribution Agreement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Subsequent agreement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim 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	General Practice40% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Construction Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim 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	Experienced60% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Gifts Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Salem Ibrahim has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Salem Ibrahim has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 7 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Salem Ibrahim LLC	7 cases	70% of cases	Siraj Ansari v Juliana Bahadin: Trust Deed Validity & Trustee Removal Dispute(Aug 2022) Civelli v. Mulacek: Forum Non Conveniens & Anti-Suit Injunction in Loan Dispute(Aug 2019) UDA v UDB: Division of Matrimonial Assets & Third-Party Interests in Divorce Proceedings(Apr 2018)
Salem Ibrahim and Partners	2 cases	20% of cases	Asian Corporate Services v Impact Pacific: Setting Aside Anton Piller Order(Aug 2005) Kensteel Engineering v OSV Engineering: Contractual Terms, Discharge, and Quantum Meruit(Feb 2005)
Salem Ibrahim & Partners	1 cases	10% of cases	XFactor Consolidated v IT21: Dispute over Distribution Agreement and Joint Venture for Educational Software(May 2009)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Salem Ibrahim's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 5.9
Complex Cases: 3 (30%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	42.8 parties avg	2.8	40%
Neutral	27.2 parties avg	7.2	20%
Partial	18.0 parties avg	8.0	10%
Won	56.1 parties avg	6.1	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2005	27.1 parties avg	7.1
2009	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	18.0 parties avg	8.0
2017	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2018	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2019	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2022	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	4(33%)	33%
Neutral	2(17%)	17%
Partial	1(8%)	8%
Won	5(42%)	42%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.004 cases	4
USD	340,500.00	340,500.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2005	3 111	Lost: 1 cases (33.3%) Neutral: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2009	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2017	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 10 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Siraj Ansari v Juliana Bahadin: Trust Deed Validity & Trustee Removal Dispute 07 Aug 2022 Mirza bin Juliana (Defendant)Won	07 Aug 2022	Mirza bin Juliana (Defendant): Counterclaim AllowedThe defendant's counterclaim to remove the plaintiff as trustee was allowed.
2	Civelli v. Mulacek: Forum Non Conveniens & Anti-Suit Injunction in Loan Dispute 13 Aug 2019 Philippe Emanuel Mulacek (Defendant)Lost	13 Aug 2019	Philippe Emanuel Mulacek (Defendant): Application for anti-suit injunction dismissedMr Mulacek’s application for an anti-suit injunction to restrain the Texas proceedings is dismissed.
3	UDA v UDB: Division of Matrimonial Assets & Third-Party Interests in Divorce Proceedings 23 Apr 2018 UDB (Respondent)Won	23 Apr 2018	UDB (Respondent): Successful in resisting appealSuccessfully resisted the appeal.
4	UDA v UDB: Division of Matrimonial Assets & Jurisdiction in Matrimonial Proceedings 27 Jun 2017 UDB (Respondent)Neutral	27 Jun 2017	UDB (Respondent): NeutralAncillary Matters proceedings stayed to allow the Husband the opportunity to pursue a civil action.
5	Tay Kar Oon v Tahir: Appeal Against Imprisonment for Contempt of Court 25 Apr 2017 Tay Kar Oon (Appellant)Won	25 Apr 2017	Tay Kar Oon (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed to the extent that the imprisonment was set aside and substituted with a fine.
6	Higgins v Mulacek: Breach of Contract & Fiduciary Duty in Aircraft Management 25 Sep 2016 Stefan Wood (Defendant by counterclaim)Won	25 Sep 2016	Stefan Wood (Defendant by counterclaim): Judgment for DefendantJudgment in favor of the defendant on the counterclaim.
7	Wee Cheng Swee v Jo Baby: Loan vs Gift Dispute over Property & Car Purchase 24 May 2015 Jo Baby Kartika Polim (Defendant, Respondent)Lost	24 May 2015	Jo Baby Kartika Polim (Defendant, Respondent): Appeal dismissedDefendant's appeal against the judgment entered by the Assistant Registrar on claims 3 and 4 was dismissed. The currency is assumed to be SGD, the currency of Singapore, where the judgment was issued.
8	XFactor Consolidated v IT21: Dispute over Distribution Agreement and Joint Venture for Educational Software 19 May 2009 XFactor Consolidated (M) Sdn Bhd (Plaintiff)Lost	19 May 2009	XFactor Consolidated (M) Sdn Bhd (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedPlaintiff's claim for breach of contract and joint venture was dismissed due to unclear pleadings and evidence. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	Asian Corporate Services v Impact Pacific: Setting Aside Anton Piller Order 03 Aug 2005 Mark Justin Baile (Defendant)Neutral	03 Aug 2005	Mark Justin Baile (Defendant): Original orders to stand, while preserving their respective positions pending the trialThe parties have reached an agreement to allow the original orders to stand, while preserving their respective positions pending the trial. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
10	Kensteel Engineering v OSV Engineering: Contractual Terms, Discharge, and Quantum Meruit 03 Feb 2005 Kensteel Engineering Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	03 Feb 2005	Kensteel Engineering Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedPlaintiff's claim for $1,057,308.61 was dismissed with costs. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the jurisdiction is Singapore.