Tan Hui Ru Louisa

Tan Hui Ru Louisa is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2010 to 2010. The lawyer has handled 1 case in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in breach of contract and shipping law.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated expertise across 8 primary practice areas, with significant experience in breach of contract and shipping law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Breach of Contract	1 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Shipping Law	1 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Admiralty Jurisdiction and Arrest	1 cases	13% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	13% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	13% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Charterparty	1 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Mitigation of Damages	1 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Voyage Charterparty	1 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tan Hui Ru Louisa has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Tan Hui Ru Louisa has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 1 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Shook Lin & Bok LLP	1 cases	100% of cases	The "Asia Star": Mitigation of Damages in Voyage Charterparty Dispute(Mar 2010)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Tan Hui Ru Louisa's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.0
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Tan Hui Ru Louisa's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(100%)	100%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
USD	399,500.00	399,500.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2010	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 1 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	The "Asia Star": Mitigation of Damages in Voyage Charterparty Dispute 18 Mar 2010 Respondent (Malaysian Company) (Respondent)Lost	18 Mar 2010	Respondent (Malaysian Company) (Respondent): Damages AwardedDamages awarded in the amount of $399,500 (assumed USD, as the damages were calculated in USD). The appeal was allowed, but the respondent was still entitled to recover the sum of US$399,500, which is the additional expense that it would have been put to had it chartered the Puma, together with interest on that sum fixed at 3% per annum from the date on which the writ in the present action was filed until payment.