Teo Jim Yang

Teo Jim Yang is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2022 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in cross-border insolvency and mareva injunctions. Their track record shows a 100.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 25% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated expertise across 22 primary practice areas, with significant experience in arbitration and contract law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Arbitration	3 cases	12% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	8% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Cross-Border Insolvency	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Mareva Injunctions	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Dissolution	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Arbitration	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Recognition of foreign insolvency proceedings	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Shareholders Agreement	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Company Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Ship Mortgage	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Best effort obligations	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Admiralty and Maritime Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Obligations imposed	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Jim Yang has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Teo Jim Yang has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Ascendant Legal LLC	4 cases	100% of cases	Sapura Fabrication Sdn Bhd v GAS: Cross-Border Insolvency, Arbitration, and Enforcement of Arbitral Agreements(Sep 2024) KfW IPEX-Bank GmbH v Owner of WORLD DREAM: Ship Mortgage & Gaming Equipment Dispute(Feb 2024) Milaha Explorer Pte Ltd v Pengrui Leasing: Appeal Over Mareva Injunction in Ship Sale Dispute(Feb 2023)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Teo Jim Yang's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.5
Complex Cases: 1 (25%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Won	43.5 parties avg	3.5	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2022	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2024	24.5 parties avg	4.5

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Teo Jim Yang's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Won	4(100%)	100%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	45,000.00	22,500.002 cases	2
USD	42,950,829.71	42,950,829.711 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2022	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Sapura Fabrication Sdn Bhd v GAS: Cross-Border Insolvency, Arbitration, and Enforcement of Arbitral Agreements 17 Sep 2024 GAS (Non-Party)Won	17 Sep 2024	GAS (Non-Party): Carve-out grantedCarve-out granted to GAS to proceed with arbitration against Sapura Entities, subject to condition of no enforcement without court permission. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	KfW IPEX-Bank GmbH v Owner of WORLD DREAM: Ship Mortgage & Gaming Equipment Dispute 27 Feb 2024 KfW IPEX-Bank GmbH (Claimant)Won	27 Feb 2024	KfW IPEX-Bank GmbH (Claimant): Application granted in their favourThe court ruled that the mortgage extended to the gaming equipment on board the vessel.
3	Milaha Explorer Pte Ltd v Pengrui Leasing: Appeal Over Mareva Injunction in Ship Sale Dispute 19 Feb 2023 Milaha Explorer Pte Ltd (Appellant)Won	19 Feb 2023	Milaha Explorer Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; Mareva injunction set aside; costs awarded to Milaha Explorer Pte Ltd fixed at $45,000 (inclusive of disbursements) for its costs here and below. Pengrui was ordered to refund the costs below paid by Milaha. The usual consequential orders applied. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Carlsberg v CSAPL: Breach of Contract & Best Effort Obligations in Loan Repayment Dispute 09 Jan 2022 Carlsberg Breweries A/S (Appellant, Plaintiff)Won	09 Jan 2022	Carlsberg Breweries A/S (Appellant, Plaintiff): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; all outstanding amounts under the Loan Agreement are due and payable.