Tony Yeo

Tony Yeo is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2019. The lawyer has handled 22 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 4 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in patents and intellectual property law. Their track record shows a 41.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 9 complex cases, representing 41% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Tony Yeo has demonstrated expertise across 72 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	17 cases	10% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 17 cases which represents 10% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	8 cases	5% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 8 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	8 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 8 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Patents	7 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized91% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 7 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	7 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice34% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 7 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Company Law	6 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice43% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	6 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice33% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 6 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	6 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Law	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized79% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	4 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced71% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Litigation	4 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice38% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Passing Off	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Affidavits	3 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice23% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trademark Infringement	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced62% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Malicious Falsehood	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced58% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	3 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice36% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Patent Amendments	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trust Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Assessment of Damages	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unjust Enrichment	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Ad Hoc Admission	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Defamation	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Disclosure of documents	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Director's Duties	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized78% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Proprietary Estoppel	2 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Patent Infringement	2 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized87% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Experiments	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Patent Validity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Novelty	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Inventive step	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Patent Amendment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Patent Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Remoteness of Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Rules in awarding Damages	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Groundless threat of infringement proceedings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sufficiency of Disclosure	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Governance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Corporate Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Pharmaceutical Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Inducement of Breach of Contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Burden of proof	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Formation of contract	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Discovery of documents	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tony Yeo 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 Practice25% relevance score	Tony Yeo 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	General Practice30% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Duty	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Companies Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Laches	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Acquiescence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice35% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Constructive Trust	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Commercial Court Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Joint Venture Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Law of Pleadings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Professional Privilege	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Domain Name Disputes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tony Yeo has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Tony Yeo has been affiliated with 4 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 11 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Drew & Napier LLC	11 cases	50% of cases	TWG Tea Co Pte Ltd v Murjani Manoj Mohan: Domain Name Ownership Dispute & Defamation Counterclaim(May 2019) BCBC Singapore v PT Bayan Resources: Breach of Contract & Damages(Jan 2019) Element Six Technologies Ltd v IIa Technologies Pte Ltd: Discovery of Documents in Patent Litigation(Aug 2018)
Drew and Napier LLC	7 cases	32% of cases	Novartis v Ranbaxy: Patent Amendment, Valsartan, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Singapore(Dec 2012) Trek Technology v FE Global: Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel in Patent Infringement Appeal(Dec 2005) Platts-Mills v Trek Technology: Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel for Patent Infringement Appeal(Oct 2005)
Drew & Napier	3 cases	14% of cases	FE Global Electronics v Trek Technology: Patent Infringement, Purposive Claim Construction & Validity(Dec 2005) Genelabs v Institut Pasteur: HIV-2 Patent Validity & Infringement(Nov 2000) Institut Pasteur v Genelabs: HIV-2 Patent Infringement & Validity Dispute(Mar 2000)
Lie Kee Pong Partnserhip	1 cases	5% of cases	Mopi Pte Ltd v Central Mercantile Corporation: Trademark Dispute over Hi-Bond Mark(Oct 2001)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Tony Yeo's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.4
Complex Cases: 9 (41%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	93.2 parties avg	3.2	41%
Partial	43.3 parties avg	3.3	18%
Won	93.5 parties avg	3.5	41%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	23.5 parties avg	3.5
2001	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2003	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2004	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2005	54.4 parties avg	4.4
2009	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	23.0 parties avg	3.0
2012	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2013	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2014	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2017	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2018	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2019	24.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	9(41%)	41%
Partial	4(18%)	18%
Won	9(41%)	41%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	269,000.00	26,900.0010 cases	10

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2001	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2003	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2004	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	5 23	Lost: 2 cases (40.0%) Won: 3 cases (60.0%)
2009	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2012	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2013	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2018	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 22 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	TWG Tea Co Pte Ltd v Murjani Manoj Mohan: Domain Name Ownership Dispute & Defamation Counterclaim 02 May 2019 Maranda Barnes Bou Qdib (Defendant in counterclaim)Won	02 May 2019	Maranda Barnes Bou Qdib (Defendant in counterclaim): Counterclaim DismissedCounterclaim against Maranda Barnes Bou Qdib is dismissed.
2	BCBC Singapore v PT Bayan Resources: Breach of Contract & Damages 08 Jan 2019 Bayan International Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	08 Jan 2019	Bayan International Pte Ltd (Defendant): LostThe court found that BCBCS had the financial ability to fund KSC until the completion of commissioning and testing at the Tabang Plant or until June 2012.
3	Element Six Technologies Ltd v IIa Technologies Pte Ltd: Discovery of Documents in Patent Litigation 26 Aug 2018 IIa Technologies Pte Ltd (Defendant, Applicant)Lost	26 Aug 2018	IIa Technologies Pte Ltd (Defendant, Applicant): Specific discovery denied in partRequests 3, 5, and 6 disallowed. Request 4(ii) disallowed. Request 2 (limited) and Request 4(i) granted.
4	BCBC Singapore v PT Bayan: Breach of Contract & Remedies in Joint Venture Coal Briquetting Project 24 Jul 2017 Bayan International Pte Ltd (Defendant)Lost	24 Jul 2017	Bayan International Pte Ltd (Defendant): Repudiated Joint Venture DeedThe court found that the Defendant repudiated the Joint Venture Deed. The monetary amount is set to 0.00 as the quantum of damages will be determined in Tranche 3. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Ho Kang Peng v Scintronix: Breach of Fiduciary Duty for Unauthorized Payments 29 Apr 2014 Scintronix Corp Ltd (formerly known as TTL Holdings Ltd) (Respondent)Won	29 Apr 2014	Scintronix Corp Ltd (formerly known as TTL Holdings Ltd) (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal was dismissed, upholding the High Court's decision that Ho Kang Peng breached his fiduciary duties.
6	Scintronix v Ho Kang Peng: Director's Breach of Duty & Employee Fidelity in Employee Poaching & Payments 07 Feb 2013 Scintronix Corp Ltd (formerly known as TTL Holdings Ltd) (Plaintiff)Partial	07 Feb 2013	Scintronix Corp Ltd (formerly known as TTL Holdings Ltd) (Plaintiff): Judgment for Plaintiff in partJudgment for the Plaintiff against Ho Kang Peng with damages to be assessed. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Novartis v Ranbaxy: Patent Amendment, Valsartan, Pharmaceutical Preparations, Singapore 27 Dec 2012 Novartis AG (Plaintiff)Won	27 Dec 2012	Novartis AG (Plaintiff): Application GrantedPrayer 1 of the plaintiffs’ application is granted in terms.
8	Low Tuck Kwong v Sukamto Sia: Defamation, Malicious Falsehood & Breach of Contract Dispute over Coal Mining Shares 21 Nov 2012 Low Tuck Kwong (Plaintiff)Lost	21 Nov 2012	Low Tuck Kwong (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedPlaintiff's claim in defamation and malicious falsehood was dismissed.
9	Hau Tau Khang v Sanur Indonesian Restaurant: Director's Right to Inspect Company Accounts & Fiduciary Duty 24 Apr 2011 Hau Tau Thong (Appellant)Partial	24 Apr 2011	Hau Tau Thong (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part.
10	Scintronix Corp Ltd v Ho Kang Peng: Bifurcation of Liability and Damages in Director Breach of Duty Claim 01 Feb 2011 Scintronix Corp Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	01 Feb 2011	Scintronix Corp Ltd (Plaintiff): Appeal allowedThe plaintiff's appeal against the Assistant Registrar's decision was allowed, and the application for bifurcation was granted.
11	Low Tuck Kwong v Sukamto Sia: Defamation, Malicious Falsehood & Coal Mining Arrangement Dispute 24 May 2010 Low Tuck Kwong (Plaintiff, Respondent)Lost	24 May 2010	Low Tuck Kwong (Plaintiff, Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe plaintiff's appeal against the dismissal of his application to strike out the defendant's counterclaim was dismissed.
12	Fish & Co v MFM Restaurants: Damages Assessment for Breach of Contract 25 Nov 2009 Fish & Co Restaurants Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant)Partial	25 Nov 2009	Fish & Co Restaurants Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal allowed in partDamages of $269,000 awarded. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
13	FE Global Electronics v Trek Technology: Patent Infringement, Purposive Claim Construction & Validity 29 Dec 2005 Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Respondent, Plaintiff)Won	29 Dec 2005	Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Respondent, Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the plaintiff, with damages to be assessed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
14	Trek Technology v FE Global: Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel in Patent Infringement Appeal 05 Dec 2005 Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Appellant)Won	05 Dec 2005	Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed with costs here and below. Security deposit to be released to the appellant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
15	Platts-Mills v Trek Technology: Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel for Patent Infringement Appeal 06 Oct 2005 Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Respondent)Lost	06 Oct 2005	Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal against DecisionTrek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd appealed against the decision to allow the application.
16	Mopi Pte Ltd v Central Mercantile Corp (S) Ltd: Trademark Infringement & Passing Off Dispute 29 Sep 2005 Mopi Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant)Lost	29 Sep 2005	Mopi Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal DismissedThe plaintiff's appeal was dismissed. The currency is assumed to be SGD, the currency of Singapore.
17	Trek Technology v FE Global: Patent Infringement, Validity & Misrepresentation 11 May 2005 Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant)Won	11 May 2005	Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Defendant): Claims allowedTrek's claims in Suit 609/2002 and Suit 672/2002 were allowed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
18	Mopi Pte Ltd v Central Mercantile Corp (S) Ltd: Discovery of Documents and Use in Separate Proceedings 25 Feb 2004 Mopi Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	25 Feb 2004	Mopi Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedMopi's claim for passing off was dismissed.
19	Trek Technology v FE Global Electronics: Patent Rights Dispute & Discovery of Internal Emails 24 Aug 2003 Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Partial	24 Aug 2003	Trek Technology (Singapore) Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part; the right to make the discovery application was reserved before the trial judge.
20	Mopi Pte Ltd v Central Mercantile Corporation: Trademark Dispute over Hi-Bond Mark 30 Oct 2001 Mopi Pte Ltd (Plaintiff)Lost	30 Oct 2001	Mopi Pte Ltd (Plaintiff): Claim DismissedThe plaintiffs' claim was dismissed with costs to the defendants. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
21	Genelabs v Institut Pasteur: HIV-2 Patent Validity & Infringement 01 Nov 2000 Another (Respondent)Won	01 Nov 2000	Another (Respondent): Appeal dismissedThe appeal was dismissed with costs and with the usual consequential orders. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
22	Institut Pasteur v Genelabs: HIV-2 Patent Infringement & Validity Dispute 30 Mar 2000 Pasteur Sanofi Diagnostics (Plaintiff)Won	30 Mar 2000	Pasteur Sanofi Diagnostics (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; monetary amount is 0.00 as the amount will be determined during assessment of damages. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.