Timothy Tan

Timothy Tan is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2003 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 7 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in admiralty and maritime law and shipping law. Their track record shows a 43.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 3 complex cases, representing 43% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Timothy Tan has demonstrated expertise across 36 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and arbitration.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	6 cases	10% of total caseload	General Practice42% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	6 cases	10% of total caseload	Experienced52% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Admiralty and Maritime Law	5 cases	8% of total caseload	Highly Specialized94% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Shipping Law	4 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	3 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Winding Up	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Private International Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced64% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	2 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Natural forum	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Stay of Proceedings	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Admiralty Jurisdiction and Arrest	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Bills of Lading Act	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Duty of disclosure	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Insolvency	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Time-Bar	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Party Autonomy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Joinder of Parties	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Double Separability	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arrest of Vessel	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Business Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Charterparty Disputes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Restructuring	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Forum Non Conveniens	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
International Arbitration	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Schemes of Arrangement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Arbitration	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Timothy Tan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Timothy Tan has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
AsiaLegal LLC	5 cases	71% of cases	Symphony Shipbuilding SA v Sea Justice Ltd: Forum Non Conveniens & Duty of Disclosure in Admiralty Collision Case(Dec 2023) Batavia EXIMP v Owner of Vessels: Stay of Proceedings & Time-Bar Waiver in Admiralty Dispute(May 2021) CJD v CJE and CJF: Dispute over Joinder of Third Parties in Arbitration under LCIA Rules(Mar 2021)
Asia Legal LLC	2 cases	29% of cases	The "Sea Justice": Collision Dispute, Forum Non Conveniens, and Admiralty Jurisdiction(Feb 2024) Re Econ Corp Ltd: Scheme of Arrangement Approval Dispute(Nov 2003)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Timothy Tan's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 7.3
Complex Cases: 3 (43%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	43.4 parties avg	3.4	57%
Won	310.5 parties avg	10.5	43%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2003	118.0 parties avg	18.0
2010	23.5 parties avg	3.5
2021	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2023	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2024	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Timothy Tan's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	4(57%)	57%
Won	3(43%)	43%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	10,000.00	2,500.004 cases	4

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2003	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2021	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2023	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2024	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 7 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	The "Sea Justice": Collision Dispute, Forum Non Conveniens, and Admiralty Jurisdiction 08 Feb 2024 THE OWNER AND/OR DEMISE CHARTERER OF THE VESSEL “A SYMPHONY” (Plaintiff, Respondent)Lost	08 Feb 2024	THE OWNER AND/OR DEMISE CHARTERER OF THE VESSEL “A SYMPHONY” (Plaintiff, Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal against the order for return of security and the costs order was dismissed. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	Symphony Shipbuilding SA v Sea Justice Ltd: Forum Non Conveniens & Duty of Disclosure in Admiralty Collision Case 28 Dec 2023 Symphony Shipbuilding SA (Plaintiff)Lost	28 Dec 2023	Symphony Shipbuilding SA (Plaintiff): Stay Application granted against PlaintiffStay Application granted against Plaintiff.
3	Batavia EXIMP v Owner of Vessels: Stay of Proceedings & Time-Bar Waiver in Admiralty Dispute 30 May 2021 Owner of the vessels Ever Golden & 9 Ors (Respondent)Won	30 May 2021	Owner of the vessels Ever Golden & 9 Ors (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; Batavia to pay costs of the appeals fixed at $5,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	CJD v CJE and CJF: Dispute over Joinder of Third Parties in Arbitration under LCIA Rules 18 Mar 2021 CJD (Plaintiff)Lost	18 Mar 2021	CJD (Plaintiff): Originating Summons dismissedOriginating Summons dismissed with costs. The plaintiff was ordered to pay costs to the defendants fixed at $11,500 together with reasonable disbursements (to be agreed and failing agreement, taxed) for OS 1446 and SUM 1075. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	The "Engedi": Stay of Admiralty Action in Rem Pending Arbitration 24 Mar 2010 Capital Gate Holdings Pte Ltd (Appellant, Intervener)Won	24 Mar 2010	Capital Gate Holdings Pte Ltd (Appellant, Intervener): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed in so far as the proceedings had been stayed. The stay order granted below was set aside.
6	T S Lines Ltd v The "Eagle Prestige": Disclosure Requirements for Warrant of Arrest in Admiralty Claim 22 Mar 2010 Capital Gate Holdings Pte Ltd (Intervener, Respondent)Lost	22 Mar 2010	Capital Gate Holdings Pte Ltd (Intervener, Respondent): Summons No 1777 of 2009 to set aside the warrant of arrest was unmeritoriousThe intervener's application to set aside the arrest of the Eagle Prestige was unmeritorious. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Re Econ Corp Ltd: Scheme of Arrangement Approval Dispute 23 Nov 2003 Tat Hong Machinery Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	23 Nov 2003	Tat Hong Machinery Pte Ltd (Respondent): Application dismissedThe application for sanction of the scheme of arrangement was dismissed.