Teo Chun-Wei Benedict

Teo Chun-Wei Benedict is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2012 to 2025. The lawyer has handled 11 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in arbitration and international arbitration. Their track record shows a 55.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 2 complex cases, representing 18% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated expertise across 58 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and breach of contract.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	9 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 9 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	5 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice49% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized87% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Torts	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Contracts	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligence	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contractual terms	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Natural justice	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Vicarious liability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Anti-suit injunction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Comity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Money and moneylenders	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict 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	General Practice20% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Proportionality	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Setting Aside Arbitral Award	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict 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	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Assessment of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Liquidation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Interpretation of contractual terms	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
UNCITRAL Model Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Letter of Indemnity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Reopening of transactions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Non-reliance clause	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of unless order	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict 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	General Practice40% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict 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	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Investments	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Undue Influence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Holding out	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Construction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Causation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict 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	General Practice40% relevance score	Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Teo Chun-Wei Benedict has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 10 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Drew & Napier LLC	10 cases	91% of cases	Glassberg v UBS AG: Breach of Contract, Negligence & Vicarious Liability in Investment Advice(Jan 2025) Asiana Airlines v Gate Gourmet: Anti-Suit Injunctions & Arbitration Agreements(Oct 2024) DNG FZE v PayPal Pte Ltd: Striking Out Pleadings for Breach of Unless Order(Mar 2024)
Drew & Napier LLP	1 cases	9% of cases	BLB v BLC: Setting Aside Arbitral Award for Failure to Decide Counterclaim(Sep 2013)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Teo Chun-Wei Benedict's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.9
Complex Cases: 2 (18%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	34.0 parties avg	4.0	27%
Partial	23.5 parties avg	3.5	18%
Won	62.2 parties avg	2.2	55%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2012	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2013	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2017	17.0 parties avg	7.0
2018	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2020	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2022	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2024	23.5 parties avg	3.5
2025	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Teo Chun-Wei Benedict's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(27%)	27%
Partial	2(18%)	18%
Won	6(55%)	55%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	673,982.14	112,330.366 cases	6

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2012	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2025	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 11 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Glassberg v UBS AG: Breach of Contract, Negligence & Vicarious Liability in Investment Advice 09 Jan 2025 UBS AG, Singapore Branch (Defendant)Won	09 Jan 2025	UBS AG, Singapore Branch (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe defendant successfully defended against the plaintiff's claims of breach of contract, negligence, and vicarious liability.
2	Asiana Airlines v Gate Gourmet: Anti-Suit Injunctions & Arbitration Agreements 28 Oct 2024 Asiana Airlines, Inc (Appellant)Partial	28 Oct 2024	Asiana Airlines, Inc (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partThe anti-suit injunction granted in respect of the claims against the directors in the Korean Compensation Proceedings was set aside.
3	DNG FZE v PayPal Pte Ltd: Striking Out Pleadings for Breach of Unless Order 11 Mar 2024 PayPal Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent)Won	11 Mar 2024	PayPal Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent): Claim Struck OutPlaintiff's claim was struck out due to breach of an unless order. Costs of $5,000 in SUM 326 and $20,000 in RA 24 awarded to the defendant (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	Glassberg v UBS AG: Striking Out Claims for Losses in Direct Lending Income Fund 14 Dec 2022 UBS AG, Singapore Branch (Defendant, Respondent)Won	14 Dec 2022	UBS AG, Singapore Branch (Defendant, Respondent): Contract Claims Struck OutThe court struck out the plaintiff's contract claims.
5	ST Building Solutions Pte Ltd v FortyTwo Pte Ltd: Assessment of Damages for Water Damage 31 Aug 2020 ST Building Solutions Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	31 Aug 2020	ST Building Solutions Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $251,607.14 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Evan Lim v MWA Capital: Reopening Loan Transactions under Moneylenders Act 12 Nov 2018 MWA Capital Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	12 Nov 2018	MWA Capital Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal dismissedAppeal dismissed with costs of $38,000 (inclusive of disbursements) awarded to MWA Capital Pte Ltd. Costs of the Liquidators’ joinder application fixed at $2,000 (both inclusive of disbursements) in favour of MWA. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Major Shipping & Trading Inc v Standard Chartered Bank: Unauthorized Fund Transfers & Bank's Duty of Care 03 Jan 2018 Standard Chartered Bank (Singapore) Limited (Defendant)Won	03 Jan 2018	Standard Chartered Bank (Singapore) Limited (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment in favor of the defendant; the plaintiff was ordered to pay costs of S$384,375 to the defendant on an indemnity basis (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
8	CIFG Special Assets Capital I Ltd v Ong Puay Koon: Contractual Term Interpretation & Indemnity 28 Nov 2017 CIFG Special Assets Capital I Ltd (formerly known as Diamond Kendall Limited) (Appellant, Respondent)Lost	28 Nov 2017	CIFG Special Assets Capital I Ltd (formerly known as Diamond Kendall Limited) (Appellant, Respondent): Appeal dismissedAppeal dismissed; the court found that the indemnity clause did not make each party responsible for the breach of any term of the contract. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	BLC v BLB: Setting Aside Arbitral Award for Breach of Natural Justice 29 Jul 2014 BLB and another (Respondent)Lost	29 Jul 2014	BLB and another (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs. The usual consequential orders will follow. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
10	BLB v BLC: Setting Aside Arbitral Award for Failure to Decide Counterclaim 29 Sep 2013 BLB (Plaintiff)Partial	29 Sep 2013	BLB (Plaintiff): Partial WinApplication allowed in part; Disputed Counterclaim for Receivables and costs remitted to a new tribunal for determination.
11	Als Memasa v UBS AG: Appeal on Russian Bonds Purchase & Misrepresentation 14 Aug 2012 UBS AG (Respondent)Lost	14 Aug 2012	UBS AG (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the decision to strike out the SOC was allowed in part.