Suegene Ang

Suegene Ang is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2009 to 2023. The lawyer has handled 7 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in defamation and fiduciary duties. Their track record shows a 43.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 29% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Suegene Ang has demonstrated expertise across 28 primary practice areas, with significant experience in company law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Company Law	5 cases	11% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	4 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	4 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice37% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Defamation	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	2 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice49% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Property Law	2 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced74% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Minority Oppression	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein 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	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
By-laws	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Taxation of Legal Costs	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Scheme of Arrangement and Compromise	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Conveyance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Strata Title Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Personal Property Ownership	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Suegene Ang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Suegene Ang has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
WongPartnership LLP	5 cases	71% of cases	Wang Xiaopu v Koh Mui Lee: Fraudulent Asset Disposal & Constructive Trusts(Mar 2023) Maniach Pte Ltd v L Capital Jones Ltd: Minority Oppression & Arbitrability(Apr 2016) Automobile Association v MCST Plan No 918: Car Park By-Laws Validity Dispute(Oct 2013)
Wong Partnership LLP	2 cases	29% of cases	Lim Eng Hock Peter v Lin Jian Wei: Defamation Damages for Business Mismanagement(Jul 2010) Lim Eng Hock Peter v Lin Jian Wei: Defamation & Qualified Privilege(Oct 2009)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Suegene Ang's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.5
Complex Cases: 2 (29%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	23.6 parties avg	3.6	29%
Partial	24.5 parties avg	4.5	29%
Won	32.7 parties avg	2.7	43%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2009	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2010	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2012	17.0 parties avg	7.0
2013	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2023	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(29%)	29%
Partial	2(29%)	29%
Won	3(43%)	43%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	860,000.00	143,333.336 cases	6

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2009	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2012	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 7 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Wang Xiaopu v Koh Mui Lee: Fraudulent Asset Disposal & Constructive Trusts 28 Mar 2023 Goh Keng Meng, Jeremy (Wu Qingming) (Defendant)Lost	28 Mar 2023	Goh Keng Meng, Jeremy (Wu Qingming) (Defendant): Orders made against DefendantTransfer of monies of S$1,873,320.63 into that OCBC account (which is in Dr Jeremy’s name) is void and of no effect. Dr Jeremy sell Seascape within three months and account for and pay 50% of the monies from this sale to the Official Assignee. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Maniach Pte Ltd v L Capital Jones Ltd: Minority Oppression & Arbitrability 21 Apr 2016 Jones the Grocer Group Holdings Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	21 Apr 2016	Jones the Grocer Group Holdings Pte Ltd (Defendant): Application for stay of proceedings dismissedDefendant's application to stay the proceedings in favour of arbitration was dismissed.
3	Automobile Association v MCST Plan No 918: Car Park By-Laws Validity Dispute 21 Oct 2013 Automobile Association of Singapore (Plaintiff, Defendant)Won	21 Oct 2013	Automobile Association of Singapore (Plaintiff, Defendant): Declarations and injunctions sought grantedThe court held that the By-Laws are valid and binding on the MCST, and granted the declarations and injunctions sought by AAS. The court ordered that damages be assessed by the Registrar. Costs of OS 911/2012 awarded to AAS, together with the costs of the interim injunction that I had previously granted. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Raffles Town Club v Lim Eng Hock Peter: Breach of Directors' Duties & Conspiracy 30 Oct 2012 Lim Eng Hock Peter (Respondent, Defendant, Appellant)Partial	30 Oct 2012	Lim Eng Hock Peter (Respondent, Defendant, Appellant): Counterclaim Allowed in PartPeter Lim's claim of conspiracy against Margaret Tung and Lin Jian Wei was partially allowed.
5	Lim Eng Hock Peter v Lin Jian Wei: Defamation Claim Costs Assessment 25 Aug 2010 Lim Eng Hock Peter (Plaintiff)Won	25 Aug 2010	Lim Eng Hock Peter (Plaintiff): Costs awardedCosts awarded to the Plaintiff in the amount of $650,000 on an indemnity basis. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Lim Eng Hock Peter v Lin Jian Wei: Defamation Damages for Business Mismanagement 27 Jul 2010 Lim Eng Hock Peter (Appellant)Partial	27 Jul 2010	Lim Eng Hock Peter (Appellant): Appeal dismissed; damages awardedAppeal dismissed; damages awarded in the amount of $210,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	Lim Eng Hock Peter v Lin Jian Wei: Defamation & Qualified Privilege 07 Oct 2009 Lim Eng Hock Peter (Appellant)Won	07 Oct 2009	Lim Eng Hock Peter (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; judgment for the Appellant for damages and costs. Damages awarded on an aggravated basis. Costs awarded on an indemnity basis. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.