Suja Susan Thomas

Suja Susan Thomas is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2016 to 2020. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in landlord and tenant law and proprietary estoppel. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated expertise across 20 primary practice areas, with significant experience in property law and contract law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Property Law	3 cases	13% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced64% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Landlord and Tenant Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Proprietary Estoppel	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Resulting Trusts	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Property Disputes	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Constructive trusts	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Restitution	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Mortgage Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Suja Susan Thomas has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Suja Susan Thomas has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Ignatius J & Associates	3 cases	100% of cases	Changi Makan v Development 2003: Fraudulent Misrepresentation & Conspiracy in Property Sale(Feb 2020) United Overseas Bank v Homely Bath Services: Mortgagee's Rights vs. Tenant's Rights in Property Possession(Jan 2019) Sumoi Paramesvaeri v Fleury Jeffrey Gerard: Property Rights & Trusts Dispute(Sep 2016)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Suja Susan Thomas's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.0
Complex Cases: 1 (33%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	23.0 parties avg	3.0	67%
Won	15.0 parties avg	5.0	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2016	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2019	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2020	15.0 parties avg	5.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Suja Susan Thomas's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(67%)	67%
Won	1(33%)	33%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2016	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Changi Makan v Development 2003: Fraudulent Misrepresentation & Conspiracy in Property Sale 06 Feb 2020 Mohamed Haneefa Iqbal (Defendant)Won	06 Feb 2020	Mohamed Haneefa Iqbal (Defendant): Claims DismissedThe plaintiff's claims against the fourth defendant were dismissed.
2	United Overseas Bank v Homely Bath Services: Mortgagee's Rights vs. Tenant's Rights in Property Possession 23 Jan 2019 Skillmax Precision Technologies (S) Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	23 Jan 2019	Skillmax Precision Technologies (S) Pte Ltd (Defendant): Claim DismissedClaim dismissed; the court ruled against the tenant's challenge to the mortgagee's action for possession (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	Sumoi Paramesvaeri v Fleury Jeffrey Gerard: Property Rights & Trusts Dispute 01 Sep 2016 Uma Davi d/o Ponnusamy @ Mrs Fleury Jeffrey Gerard (Defendant, Plaintiff)Lost	01 Sep 2016	Uma Davi d/o Ponnusamy @ Mrs Fleury Jeffrey Gerard (Defendant, Plaintiff): Counterclaim DismissedDefendants' counterclaim is dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.