Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn

Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2020 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in statutory interpretation and striking out. Their track record shows a 100.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated expertise across 14 primary practice areas, with significant experience in constitutional law and statutory interpretation.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Constitutional Law	2 cases	12% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	2 cases	12% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	2 cases	12% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 12% of their total caseload.
Criminal Procedure	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Criminal Review	1 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Companies Act	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Judicial Review	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Director's Disqualification	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Restructuring and Insolvency	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	1 cases	6% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 3 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	3 cases	100% of cases	Masoud Rahimi v Attorney-General: Constitutional Challenge to Post-appeal Applications in Capital Cases Act(Mar 2024) Kardachi v Attorney-General: Director Disqualification under Section 155A Companies Act(Sep 2020) The Online Citizen Pte Ltd v Attorney-General: POFMA, Statutory Interpretation & Online Falsehoods(Feb 2020)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 13.7
Complex Cases: 1 (33%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Won	313.7 parties avg	13.7	100%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2020	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2024	137.0 parties avg	37.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Teo Meng Hui Jocelyn's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Won	3(100%)	100%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	20,000.00	20,000.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2020	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Masoud Rahimi v Attorney-General: Constitutional Challenge to Post-appeal Applications in Capital Cases Act 26 Mar 2024 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	26 Mar 2024	Attorney-General (Respondent): Appeal dismissedAppeal dismissed due to the appellants' lack of standing.
2	Kardachi v Attorney-General: Director Disqualification under Section 155A Companies Act 21 Sep 2020 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	21 Sep 2020	Attorney-General (Respondent): WonAppeal dismissed; awarded costs of $20,000 inclusive of disbursements (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	The Online Citizen Pte Ltd v Attorney-General: POFMA, Statutory Interpretation & Online Falsehoods 18 Feb 2020 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	18 Feb 2020	Attorney-General (Respondent): Application dismissedThe Attorney-General successfully defended the Part 3 Correction Direction issued to The Online Citizen Pte Ltd.