Tang Jin Sheng

Tang Jin Sheng is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2009 to 2025. The lawyer has handled 22 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 5 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in construction law and building and construction contracts. Their track record shows a 39.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 4 complex cases, representing 18% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated expertise across 89 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and construction law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	16 cases	10% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 16 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	10 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized82% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 10 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	7 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice42% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 7 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	6 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced72% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Contracts	5 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized86% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced67% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	4 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice49% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	4 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice17% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced62% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	3 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	3 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice31% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligence	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice13% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Implied Terms	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Compensation for delays	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Criminal Revision	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice13% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced68% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sub-contracts	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Complicity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Setting aside	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Road Traffic Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Discharge	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Restitution	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conflict of Interest	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of natural justice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Defamation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appeals	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Criminal conspiracy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Building and Construction Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Beneficiaries Rights	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Common intention	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mortgage Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice0% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Procedural Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Professional Conduct Rules	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice0% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Workplace Safety and Health	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Penal Code	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Limitation of Liability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wasted Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Pyramid Scheme	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Probate	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Proprietary Claim	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Terms	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Ground for termination of contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Security of Payment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Lease Agreement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Distress Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Adjudication	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Writ of Distress	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Business Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Cannabis Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice0% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Fraud	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insurance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Landlord and Tenant Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Work Injury Compensation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Performance Bond	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Erinford Injunction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Ponzi Schemes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Inducement of Breach of Contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy by Unlawful Means	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Causation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contributory negligence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Vicarious liability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Recourse against award	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tang Jin Sheng has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Tang Jin Sheng has been affiliated with 5 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 9 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
LVM Law Chambers LLC	9 cases	41% of cases	Sandy Island Pte Ltd v Thio Keng Thay: Damages for Defects in Construction Contract(Aug 2020) LVM Law Chambers LLC v Wan Hoe Keet: Conflict of Interest & Legal Representation(Apr 2020) Arumugam Selvaraj v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence for Voluntarily Causing Grievous Hurt(Aug 2019)
Rodyk & Davidson LLP	8 cases	36% of cases	Newcon Builders v Sino New Steel: Premature Adjudication Application under SOPA(Sep 2015) Newcon Builders v Sino New Steel: Adjudication Application, Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act(Jun 2015) ARS v ART: Tortious Interference, Breach of Contract, and Conspiracy in CCTV Supply Dispute(Apr 2015)
WhiteFern LLC	2 cases	9% of cases	Ee Hup Construction v China Jingye: Performance Bond Call & Unconscionability(Feb 2025) Nagarajan Murugesan v Grand Rich Electrical: Negligence, Worksite Accident & Contributory Negligence(Feb 2024)
Dentons Rodyk & Davidson LLP	2 cases	9% of cases	Md Rafiqul Islam Abdul Aziz v Public Prosecutor: Revision of Conviction Under Work Injury Compensation Act(Dec 2016) CAA Technologies v Newcon Builders: Sub-Contract Breach & Delay in Construction Project(Nov 2016)
LVM Law Chambers	1 cases	5% of cases	Lim Choo Eng v Koh Siew Eng: Misrepresentation Act, Restitution, and Unjust Enrichment in Land Investment Dispute(Aug 2019)

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.8
Complex Cases: 4 (18%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	82.8 parties avg	2.8	36%
Neutral	24.0 parties avg	4.0	9%
Partial	42.5 parties avg	2.5	18%
Won	92.7 parties avg	2.7	41%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2009	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2013	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2014	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2015	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2016	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2017	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2018	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2019	62.7 parties avg	2.7
2020	24.0 parties avg	4.0
2024	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2025	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	8(35%)	35%
Neutral	2(9%)	9%
Partial	4(17%)	17%
Won	9(39%)	39%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	1,083,889.21	83,376.0913 cases	13

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2009	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2015	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2016	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	6 222	Lost: 2 cases (33.3%) Partial: 2 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (33.3%)
2020	3 111	Lost: 1 cases (33.3%) Neutral: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)
2024	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2025	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 22 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Ee Hup Construction v China Jingye: Performance Bond Call & Unconscionability 10 Feb 2025 India International Insurance Pte Ltd (Respondent)Neutral	10 Feb 2025	India International Insurance Pte Ltd (Respondent): Civil proceedings discontinuedCivil proceedings against India International Insurance Pte Ltd were discontinued; no costs sought.
2	Nagarajan Murugesan v Grand Rich Electrical: Negligence, Worksite Accident & Contributory Negligence 07 Feb 2024 Eng Lee Engineering Pte Ltd (Respondent)Lost	07 Feb 2024	Eng Lee Engineering Pte Ltd (Respondent): Judgment against RespondentJudgment against the respondent jointly and severally for 90% of damages to be assessed. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Sandy Island Pte Ltd v Thio Keng Thay: Damages for Defects in Construction Contract 27 Aug 2020 Sandy Island Pte Ltd (Appellant)Lost	27 Aug 2020	Sandy Island Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; ordered to pay respondent costs for the appeal fixed at $50,000 (inclusive of disbursements). Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	LVM Law Chambers LLC v Wan Hoe Keet: Conflict of Interest & Legal Representation 02 Apr 2020 Chan Pik Sun (Other)Neutral	02 Apr 2020	Chan Pik Sun (Other): NeutralThe outcome for Ms. Chan is neutral in this appeal, as the court allowed her lawyers to continue representing her. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Arumugam Selvaraj v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence for Voluntarily Causing Grievous Hurt 27 Aug 2019 Arumugam Selvaraj (Appellant)Partial	27 Aug 2019	Arumugam Selvaraj (Appellant): Appeal dismissed in partAppeal against conviction dismissed, appeal against sentence allowed.
6	Lim Choo Eng v Koh Siew Eng: Misrepresentation Act, Restitution, and Unjust Enrichment in Land Investment Dispute 22 Aug 2019 Koh Siew Eng (Defendant)Won	22 Aug 2019	Koh Siew Eng (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court dismissed the plaintiff's claim against the defendant.
7	BSM v BSN: Setting Aside Arbitral Awards for Breach of Natural Justice & Failure to Present Case 12 Aug 2019 BSP (Respondent)Won	12 Aug 2019	BSP (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentBSM was ordered to pay the Companies’ costs in the sum of $28,000, inclusive of disbursements for both OS 747 and 748. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Thio Keng Thay v Sandy Island Pte Ltd: Construction Defects, Breach of Contract, Defamation 25 Jul 2019 Sandy Island Pte Ltd (Defendant, Plaintiff)Partial	25 Jul 2019	Sandy Island Pte Ltd (Defendant, Plaintiff): Breach of contract claim lost in partJudgment against the Defendant on the breach of contract claim, with the quantum of damages to be determined at a later stage. The court found that the defendant breached the SPA because the Property contained both general defects and lift defects. Monetary amount to be determined in the second tranche of the trial. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	Wan Hoe Keet v LVM Law Chambers LLC: Conflict of Interest and Injunction in Legal Representation 22 Apr 2019 LVM Law Chambers LLC (Respondent)Lost	22 Apr 2019	LVM Law Chambers LLC (Respondent): Injunction grantedLVM Law Chambers LLC was enjoined from acting for Chan Pik Sun in Suit 806.
10	Cai Mei Ying v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Sentence for Negligent Cycling Resulting in Grievous Hurt 06 Feb 2019 Cai Mei Ying (Appellant)Lost	06 Feb 2019	Cai Mei Ying (Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the sentence of two weeks' imprisonment was dismissed.
11	Sia Chin Sun v Yong Wai Poh: Undue Influence, Estate Assets, and Interim Injunction 17 Jun 2018 Sia Tze Ming (Non-party)Won	17 Jun 2018	Sia Tze Ming (Non-party): Intervention AllowedMs. Sia was permitted to intervene in the action for the restricted purposes of dealing with the interim injunction application, any application to vary or discharge the interim injunction, as well as any appeal arising from the interim injunction application or the application to intervene.
12	CAA Technologies v Newcon Builders: Termination of Sub-Contract & Compensation for Delays in Construction Project 17 Sep 2017 Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Respondent)Partial	17 Sep 2017	Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Respondent): Partial WinThe court upheld the decision that Newcon was entitled to terminate the Sub-Contract as CAA’s breaches of clause 2 of the Letter of Intent had substantially deprived Newcon of the whole benefit of the Sub-Contract. However, the order for CAA to pay $407,000 to Newcon for liquidated damages paid to JTC was set aside.
13	Md Rafiqul Islam Abdul Aziz v Public Prosecutor: Revision of Conviction Under Work Injury Compensation Act 08 Dec 2016 Md Rafiqul Islam Abdul Aziz (Applicant)Won	08 Dec 2016	Md Rafiqul Islam Abdul Aziz (Applicant): Appeal AllowedThe application was allowed, and the conviction and sentence imposed on the applicant were set aside.
14	CAA Technologies v Newcon Builders: Sub-Contract Breach & Delay in Construction Project 28 Nov 2016 Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Defendant, Plaintiff in Counterclaim)Won	28 Nov 2016	Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Defendant, Plaintiff in Counterclaim): Counterclaim AllowedDefendant's counterclaim is largely allowed.
15	Newcon Builders v Sino New Steel: Premature Adjudication Application under SOPA 20 Sep 2015 Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Respondent)Won	20 Sep 2015	Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Respondent): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; the Adjudication Determination was set aside. Orders made below, including the order for costs, were also set aside, with the usual consequential orders. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
16	Newcon Builders v Sino New Steel: Adjudication Application, Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act 10 Jun 2015 Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	10 Jun 2015	Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Application DismissedApplication to set aside the adjudication determination was dismissed; ordered to pay costs of $7,000 plus reasonable disbursements (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
17	ARS v ART: Tortious Interference, Breach of Contract, and Conspiracy in CCTV Supply Dispute 07 Apr 2015 ARS (Plaintiff)Lost	07 Apr 2015	ARS (Plaintiff): Claims dismissedAll claims made by the plaintiff were dismissed. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
18	LH Aluminium v Newcon: Security of Payment Act Adjudication Dispute 27 Nov 2014 Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	27 Nov 2014	Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed against the Defendant. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
19	LH Aluminium v Newcon: Premature Adjudication, Repeat Claims, and Settlement Agreements in Construction Dispute 27 May 2014 Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	27 May 2014	Newcon Builders Pte Ltd (Defendant): Application dismissedThe defendant's application to set aside the adjudication determination was dismissed, and the defendant was ordered to pay costs of $6,000 plus reasonable disbursements to the plaintiff. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
20	Cupid Jewels v Orchard Central: Distress Act & Promissory Estoppel in Rental Arrears Dispute 12 Jan 2014 Orchard Central Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	12 Jan 2014	Orchard Central Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed. Orchard Central awarded the costs of CA 32 and the costs of Cupid Jewels’ application below on an indemnity basis (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
21	Li Weiming v Public Prosecutor: Criminal Revision on Prosecution's Discovery Obligations 26 Mar 2013 Li Weiming (Applicant)Partial	26 Mar 2013	Li Weiming (Applicant): Application for particulars granted in partApplication for particulars granted in part; further particulars ordered regarding the identity of the defrauded party and the fictitious sub-contract.
22	Cove Development v Ideal Accommodation: Judgment on Admission for Recovery of Grangeford Property 15 Jul 2009 Cove Development Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	15 Jul 2009	Cove Development Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for possession of the premises. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.