Tan Si En

Tan Si En is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2013 to 2016. The lawyer has handled 5 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and sexual offences. Their track record shows a 60.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Tan Si En has demonstrated expertise across 22 primary practice areas, with significant experience in criminal law and sentencing.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Criminal Law	5 cases	16% of total caseload	Highly Specialized82% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 16% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	3 cases	10% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Penal Code	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Sexual Offences	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Commercial Sex	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Drug Trafficking	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trademark Infringement	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Importation of Drugs	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Conservation Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Appellate Litigation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Constitutional Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Criminal Revision	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tan Si En has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Tan Si En has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	5 cases	100% of cases	Tan Wei v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Excessive Sentence for Trade Marks Act Offence(Apr 2016) Public Prosecutor v Chairul: Importation of Methamphetamine under the Misuse of Drugs Act(Oct 2015) PP v Development 26: Conservation Area Violations & Sentencing(Nov 2014)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Tan Si En'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	22.0 parties avg	2.0	40%
Won	32.0 parties avg	2.0	60%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2013	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Tan Si En's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(40%)	40%
Won	3(60%)	60%

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2013	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2015	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 5 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Tan Wei v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Excessive Sentence for Trade Marks Act Offence 19 Apr 2016 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	19 Apr 2016	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the sentence was allowed, and the aggregate sentence was reduced from 14 months to 9 months.
2	Public Prosecutor v Chairul: Importation of Methamphetamine under the Misuse of Drugs Act 26 Oct 2015 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	26 Oct 2015	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for ProsecutionThe accused was convicted under s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
3	PP v Development 26: Conservation Area Violations & Sentencing 12 Nov 2014 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Lost	12 Nov 2014	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal dismissedThe prosecution's appeal against the sentence was dismissed.
4	Loh Kian Ann v Public Prosecutor: Statutory Rape Conviction Appeal 29 May 2014 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	29 May 2014	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Conviction UpheldThe Public Prosecutor successfully defended the appeal against the appellant's conviction.
5	Gwee Hak Theng v Public Prosecutor: Commercial Sex with a Minor & Sufficiency of Age Proof 14 Nov 2013 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	14 Nov 2013	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentThe Public Prosecutor successfully defended the appeal against the conviction.