Teo Jin Yun Germaine

Teo Jin Yun Germaine is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2021 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil procedure and costs. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 3 complex cases, representing 75% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated expertise across 28 primary practice areas, with significant experience in civil procedure and costs.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Civil Procedure	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Costs	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced66% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced62% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Litigation Funding	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine 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	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Security for Costs	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Arbitration	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Accountants Liability	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Setting aside	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Auditing Standards	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Financial Reporting Standards	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Reasonable Skill and Care	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Specific performance	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Recourse against award	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Jin Yun Germaine has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Teo Jin Yun Germaine has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Tan Kok Quan Partnership	4 cases	100% of cases	Hyflux Ltd v KPMG LLP: Striking Out Pleadings for Failure to Disclose Reasonable Cause of Action(Jul 2024) Lum Ooi Lin v Hyflux Ltd: Appeal on Security for Costs & Court's Discretion(Nov 2023) Hyflux Ltd v Lum Ooi Lin: Security for Costs - Litigation Funding Undertaking(Apr 2023)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Teo Jin Yun Germaine's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 5.3
Complex Cases: 3 (75%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	25%
Neutral	14.0 parties avg	4.0	25%
Won	26.0 parties avg	6.0	50%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2021	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2023	26.0 parties avg	6.0
2024	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Teo Jin Yun Germaine's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(25%)	25%
Neutral	1(25%)	25%
Won	2(50%)	50%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.003 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2021	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Hyflux Ltd v KPMG LLP: Striking Out Pleadings for Failure to Disclose Reasonable Cause of Action 09 Jul 2024 Tuaspring Pte Ltd (under receivership) (Plaintiff)Neutral	09 Jul 2024	Tuaspring Pte Ltd (under receivership) (Plaintiff): Application to strike out parts of Statement of Claim dismissedThe defendant's application to strike out parts of the Statement of Claim was dismissed.
2	Lum Ooi Lin v Hyflux Ltd: Appeal on Security for Costs & Court's Discretion 29 Nov 2023 Patrick Bance (Respondent, Appellant)Won	29 Nov 2023	Patrick Bance (Respondent, Appellant): Appeal UpheldAppeal upheld; the court accepted the Omni Undertaking as an adequate form of security. No specific monetary amount was awarded, but costs were awarded to the respondents. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Hyflux Ltd v Lum Ooi Lin: Security for Costs - Litigation Funding Undertaking 27 Apr 2023 Patrick Bance (Plaintiff, Appellant)Won	27 Apr 2023	Patrick Bance (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; security for costs to be furnished by way of an undertaking to the court jointly by Omni Bridgeway Limited and Omni Bridgeway (Singapore) Pte Ltd. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	CIP v CIQ: Recourse Against Arbitral Award - Setting Aside - Mining Joint Venture Dispute 18 Nov 2021 CIP (Applicant, Respondent)Lost	18 Nov 2021	CIP (Applicant, Respondent): Application DismissedCIP's application to set aside the arbitral award was dismissed.