Tang Gee Ni

Tang Gee Ni is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2002 to 2017. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in automobile accidents and breach of contract. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated expertise across 48 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and evidence.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	5 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Evidence	4 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	4 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	3 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice47% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Automobile Accidents	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Damages Assessment	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Contracts	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Stay of Execution	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Maintenance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Maintenance (Wife)	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Maintenance (Child)	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Formation of contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Frustration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Negligent misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Stay of Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Offences	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Account stated	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Trust	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Debt Recovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Loss of future earnings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Children's Welfare	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Matrimonial Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Assets	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Apparent Authority	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Loss of Earning Capacity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Money had and received	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Child Custody	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Constitutional Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Construction Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Criminal Revision	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Divorce	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized100% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Care and Control	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Access to Children	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tang Gee Ni has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Tang Gee Ni has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
G N Tang & Co	5 cases	63% of cases	Singland Transportation v Alpha Focus: Breach of Contract & Implied Terms Dispute(Jul 2017) Viet Hai Petroleum Corp v Ng Jun Quan: Account Stated & Apparent Authority(Apr 2016) AVM v AWH: Division of Matrimonial Assets, Wife's Maintenance, Custody and Access of Triplets(Jul 2015)
Chia & Tang	2 cases	25% of cases	Wan Kim Hock v Public Prosecutor: Criminal Breach of Trust Appeal(Dec 2002) Cheng Poh Building Construction v First City Builders: Stay of Execution on Judgment Sum(Nov 2002)
GN Tang & Co	1 cases	13% of cases	Teo Ai Ling v Koh Chai Kwang: Personal Injury Claim for Damages Assessment(Feb 2010)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Tang Gee Ni's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.1
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	25%
Partial	22.0 parties avg	2.0	25%
Won	42.3 parties avg	2.3	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2002	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2016	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2017	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Tang Gee Ni's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(25%)	25%
Partial	2(25%)	25%
Won	4(50%)	50%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	2,154,213.98	430,842.805 cases	5
USD	2,690,874.00	1,345,437.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2002	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2010	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Singland Transportation v Alpha Focus: Breach of Contract & Implied Terms Dispute 27 Jul 2017 ALPHA FOCUS (S) PTE LTD (Defendant)Lost	27 Jul 2017	ALPHA FOCUS (S) PTE LTD (Defendant): Counterclaim DismissedDefendant's counterclaim was dismissed.
2	Viet Hai Petroleum Corp v Ng Jun Quan: Account Stated & Apparent Authority 25 Apr 2016 Viet Hai Petroleum Corporation (Plaintiff)Won	25 Apr 2016	Viet Hai Petroleum Corporation (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff in the amount of $1,690,874 (USD).
3	AVM v AWH: Division of Matrimonial Assets, Wife's Maintenance, Custody and Access of Triplets 26 Jul 2015 AVM (Plaintiff)Partial	26 Jul 2015	AVM (Plaintiff): Division of Matrimonial Assets AwardedWife awarded 60% of the matrimonial assets, totaling $1,619,948.52 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	M2B World Asia Pacific v Matsumura: Oral Agreement & Failure of Consideration 05 Nov 2014 M2B World Asia Pacific Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant)Won	05 Nov 2014	M2B World Asia Pacific Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed and judgment entered for the Plaintiff in the sum of US$1m and interest at the rate of 5.33% from the date of the Writ of Summons.
5	Koh Chai Kwang v Teo Ai Ling: Appeal on Damages for Motor Accident Injuries and Loss of Future Earnings 19 May 2011 Teo Ai Ling (by her next friend, Chua Wee Bee) (Respondent)Partial	19 May 2011	Teo Ai Ling (by her next friend, Chua Wee Bee) (Respondent): Judgment modified; provisional damage order made based on loss of earning capacityJudgment modified; provisional damage order made based on loss of earning capacity at the sum assessed by the Assistant Registrar of $120,000 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Teo Ai Ling v Koh Chai Kwang: Personal Injury Claim for Damages Assessment 11 Feb 2010 Teo Ai Ling (by her next friend, Chua Wee Bee) (Plaintiff, Appellant)Won	11 Feb 2010	Teo Ai Ling (by her next friend, Chua Wee Bee) (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; total amount awarded to the plaintiff is $414,265.46 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	Wan Kim Hock v Public Prosecutor: Criminal Breach of Trust Appeal 09 Dec 2002 Wan Kim Hock (Appellant)Lost	09 Dec 2002	Wan Kim Hock (Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed, and the sentence imposed by the trial judge was affirmed.
8	Cheng Poh Building Construction v First City Builders: Stay of Execution on Judgment Sum 18 Nov 2002 First City Builders Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent)Won	18 Nov 2002	First City Builders Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent): Stay of Execution UpheldThe stay of execution on the judgment sum of $580,782 was upheld.