Sumyutha Sivamani

Sumyutha Sivamani is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2015 to 2020. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and credit and security. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated expertise across 21 primary practice areas, with significant experience in administrative law and appellate practice.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Administrative Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy Chapter 11	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Divorce	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Forum Non Conveniens	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Performance Bond	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Corporate self-representation	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Nullity Suit	1 cases	5% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Sumyutha Sivamani has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Sumyutha Sivamani has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
WhiteFern LLC	2 cases	67% of cases	Sulzer Pumps Spain v Hyflux: Unconscionability & Performance Bond Call Injunction(Jun 2020) Ding Horng Industrial Pte Ltd v Sulzer Singapore Pte Ltd: Corporate Self-Representation and Compliance with Court Orders(Jul 2019)
KhattarWong LLP	1 cases	33% of cases	Sharma v Ahuja: Forum Non Conveniens in Nullity Suit under Hindu Marriage Act(Apr 2015)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Sumyutha Sivamani'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	22.5 parties avg	2.5	67%
Won	12.0 parties avg	2.0	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2019	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2020	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Sumyutha Sivamani'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	5,000.00	2,500.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2015	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Sulzer Pumps Spain v Hyflux: Unconscionability & Performance Bond Call Injunction 16 Jun 2020 Sulzer Pumps Spain, SA (Applicant)Lost	16 Jun 2020	Sulzer Pumps Spain, SA (Applicant): Injunction dischargedThe court discharged the injunction that Sulzer Pumps Spain, SA had obtained.
2	Ding Horng Industrial Pte Ltd v Sulzer Singapore Pte Ltd: Corporate Self-Representation and Compliance with Court Orders 03 Jul 2019 Sulzer Singapore Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent)Won	03 Jul 2019	Sulzer Singapore Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent): Application deniedThe plaintiff's application for leave to appeal was denied. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Sharma v Ahuja: Forum Non Conveniens in Nullity Suit under Hindu Marriage Act 21 Apr 2015 Sanjeev Sharma s/o Shri Sarvjeet Sharma (Appellant)Lost	21 Apr 2015	Sanjeev Sharma s/o Shri Sarvjeet Sharma (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; costs of the appeal and the husband’s application to adduce further evidence fixed at $5,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).