Tham Hsu Hsien

Tham Hsu Hsien is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2005 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 15 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in medical negligence and banking law. Their track record shows a 67.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 4 complex cases, representing 27% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated expertise across 66 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	10 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 10 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice34% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	4 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Medical Negligence	4 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Evidence	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Duty of Care	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Law	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized84% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	3 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice41% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Medical Malpractice	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Negligence	3 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Informed consent	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice26% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Medical Ethics	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Assignment Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Director's Duties	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Professional conduct	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Set-off	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Limitation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Res Judicata	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Discovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Banking Secrecy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Duty	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Garnishee Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Judgments and Orders	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Insolvency Set-off	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Restraint of Trade	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien 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	Experienced65% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Division of Matrimonial Property	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Medical Registration Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien 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 Practice20% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Assignment and attachment of money held in bank	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Post-operative care	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Surgical procedure	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Service Agreements	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Non-Competition Clause	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Credit and Security	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Family Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Health Care	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Medical Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Wrongful Termination	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Performance Bond	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unconscionability	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien 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	Experienced50% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fraud and Deceit	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Receivership	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Disciplinary Proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Causation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tham Hsu Hsien has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Tham Hsu Hsien has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 13 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Allen & Gledhill LLP	13 cases	87% of cases	Alliance Divine Impex Pte Ltd v Arulappan Tony: Application for Inspection of Banker's Book(Sep 2024) Mukherjee v Biswas: Bankruptcy Proceedings & Duty to Obtain Sanction of Official Assignee(Sep 2023) BP Singapore v Jurong Aromatics: Set-Off Rights & Receivership in Debt Recovery(Feb 2020)
Allen & Gledhill	1 cases	7% of cases	D’Conceicao v Tong: Medical Negligence, Redo CABG, Duty of Care(Aug 2011)
Allen and Gledhill	1 cases	7% of cases	Lim Teng Ee Joyce v Singapore Medical Council: Appeal Against Costs Order in Disciplinary Proceedings(Jul 2005)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Tham Hsu Hsien's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.6
Complex Cases: 4 (27%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	7%
Neutral	34.0 parties avg	4.0	20%
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	7%
Won	103.7 parties avg	3.7	67%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2005	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2009	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2011	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2012	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2015	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2016	33.0 parties avg	3.0
2017	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2018	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2020	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2023	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2024	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Tham Hsu Hsien's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(7%)	7%
Neutral	3(20%)	20%
Partial	1(7%)	7%
Won	10(67%)	67%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	5,961.65	662.419 cases	9

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2005	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2009	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2012	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2015	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2016	3 3	Won: 3 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2023	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 15 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Alliance Divine Impex Pte Ltd v Arulappan Tony: Application for Inspection of Banker's Book 03 Sep 2024 DBS Bank Ltd (Non-party)Neutral	03 Sep 2024	DBS Bank Ltd (Non-party): NeutralDBS Bank Ltd was a non-party to the application and agreed to the terms of the order sought by the applicant pursuant to s 175(1) of the EA.
2	Mukherjee v Biswas: Bankruptcy Proceedings & Duty to Obtain Sanction of Official Assignee 14 Sep 2023 Bank of Singapore Limited (Respondent)Neutral	14 Sep 2023	Bank of Singapore Limited (Respondent): NeutralThe outcome for Bank of Singapore Limited is neutral as the application for pre-action discovery was not considered. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	BP Singapore v Jurong Aromatics: Set-Off Rights & Receivership in Debt Recovery 25 Feb 2020 Jason Kardachi (Respondent, Plaintiff)Won	25 Feb 2020	Jason Kardachi (Respondent, Plaintiff): Appeal upheldAppeal upheld with costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	Jurong Aromatics v BP Singapore: Insolvency Set-Off & Assignment Dispute 02 Oct 2018 Jason Kardachi (Plaintiff)Won	02 Oct 2018	Jason Kardachi (Plaintiff): Declarations grantedDeclarations granted in favour of the Plaintiffs; damages to be assessed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Hii Chii Kok v Ooi Peng Jin: Medical Negligence, Standard of Care, Doctor's Duty of Advice 11 May 2017 Ooi Peng Jin London Lucien (Respondent)Won	11 May 2017	Ooi Peng Jin London Lucien (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs to the respondent (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
6	Koo Quay Keong v Ooi Peng Jin: Negligence Claim for Post-Operative Care After Whipple Operation 23 Aug 2016 Ooi Peng Jin London Lucien (Defendant)Won	23 Aug 2016	Ooi Peng Jin London Lucien (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court found in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's claim.
7	One Investment v Cham Poh Meng: Garnishee Order on Joint Account 29 May 2016 DBS Bank Ltd (Garnishee)Won	29 May 2016	DBS Bank Ltd (Garnishee): Appeal AllowedThe appeal against the Assistant Registrar's decision was allowed, meaning DBS Bank Ltd won and is not required to garnish the joint account. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Hii Chii Kok v Ooi Peng Jin London Lucien: Medical Negligence, Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors, Bolam-Bolitho Test 21 Feb 2016 Ooi Peng Jin London Lucien (Defendant)Won	21 Feb 2016	Ooi Peng Jin London Lucien (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment for the first defendant; the plaintiff's claims were dismissed.
9	Chua Kok Tee David v DBS Bank: Fixed Deposit Dispute and Bank's Record-Keeping Practices 30 Jul 2015 DBS Bank Ltd (Defendant)Won	30 Jul 2015	DBS Bank Ltd (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantThe court found in favor of the defendant, dismissing the plaintiff's claim.
10	CKR Contract Services v Asplenium Land: Enforceability of Clause Restricting Performance Bond Calls Based on Unconscionability 21 Apr 2015 DBS Bank Ltd (Respondent)Neutral	21 Apr 2015	DBS Bank Ltd (Respondent): NeutralDBS took a neutral position and did not make any submissions.
11	Wee Chiaw Sek Anna v Ng Li-Ann: Fraudulent Misrepresentation & Division of Matrimonial Assets 27 Sep 2012 BNP Paribas Jersey Trust Corporation Limited (Defendant)Won	27 Sep 2012	BNP Paribas Jersey Trust Corporation Limited (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment in favor of the defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
12	D’Conceicao v Tong: Medical Negligence, Redo CABG, Duty of Care 21 Aug 2011 Tong Ming Chuan (Defendant)Won	21 Aug 2011	Tong Ming Chuan (Defendant): Judgment for DefendantJudgment was entered in favor of the defendant, with the plaintiff ordered to pay 85% of the defendant's costs.
13	Eu Kong Weng v Singapore Medical Council: Appeal Against Disciplinary Committee's Decision on Professional Misconduct 16 Mar 2011 Eu Kong Weng (Appellant)Lost	16 Mar 2011	Eu Kong Weng (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal against the Disciplinary Committee's decision was dismissed with costs. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the jurisdiction is Singapore.
14	Hengxin Technology v Jiang Wei: Breach of Contract & Non-Compete Dispute 18 Nov 2009 Qian Lirong (Defendant)Won	18 Nov 2009	Qian Lirong (Defendant): Judgment for Defendant on CounterclaimJudgment for Qian Lirong on his counterclaim for unpaid bonuses and damages for repudiation of the service agreement. The monetary amount is the sum of $1,260.28, RMB1,101,900.49 and RMB378,574.36, converted to SGD at the prevailing exchange rate at the time of judgment. The judgment also allows the Company to setoff and deduct the actual withholding tax paid to the tax authorities on his behalf.
15	Lim Teng Ee Joyce v Singapore Medical Council: Appeal Against Costs Order in Disciplinary Proceedings 18 Jul 2005 Lim Teng Ee Joyce (Appellant)Partial	18 Jul 2005	Lim Teng Ee Joyce (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part, reducing the amount of costs to one-third (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).