Wendy Low Wei Ling

Wendy Low Wei Ling is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2006 to 2014. The lawyer has handled 7 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in patents and breach of contract. Their track record shows a 43.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 14% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated expertise across 36 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and patents.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	6 cases	11% of total caseload	Experienced52% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Patents	3 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Evidence	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Estoppel	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Patent Revocation	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Patent Amendments	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced63% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Misrepresentation	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized88% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Agency Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Warranty of Authority	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Remedies	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Freezing Order	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Affidavits	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Adduction of Further Evidence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Patent Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Shares Allotment	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Bankruptcy	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling 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	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Injunctions	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Inducement of Breach of Contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Measure of Damages	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Duty of Candour	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Statutory Demand	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Wendy Low Wei Ling has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Wendy Low Wei Ling has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 5 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Rajah & Tann LLP	5 cases	71% of cases	Elbow Holdings v Marina Bay Sands: Discovery Order & Official Secrets Act(Feb 2014) Martek v Cargill: Arachidonic Acid Patent Validity - Novelty & Inventive Step(Feb 2012) Martek v Cargill: Patent Revocation, Microbial Oil Mixtures, and Infant Formula Supplementation(Mar 2011)
Hee Theng Fong & Co	2 cases	29% of cases	Wu Yang v Mao Yong Hui: Mareva Injunctions, Shares Allotment & Companies Act Breach(Dec 2007) Trek Technology v Ritronics Components: Interrogatories in Assessment of Damages(Dec 2006)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Wendy Low Wei Ling's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.8
Complex Cases: 1 (14%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	24.0 parties avg	4.0	29%
Partial	22.7 parties avg	2.7	29%
Won	32.0 parties avg	2.0	43%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2007	16.0 parties avg	6.0
2010	22.7 parties avg	2.7
2011	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2012	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Wendy Low Wei Ling's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(29%)	29%
Partial	2(29%)	29%
Won	3(43%)	43%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	393,434.76	65,572.466 cases	6

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2006	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2007	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2011	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2012	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 7 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Elbow Holdings v Marina Bay Sands: Discovery Order & Official Secrets Act 13 Feb 2014 Elbow Holdings Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Respondent)Won	13 Feb 2014	Elbow Holdings Pte Ltd (Plaintiff, Respondent): Application AllowedApplication for specific discovery allowed (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
2	Martek v Cargill: Arachidonic Acid Patent Validity - Novelty & Inventive Step 15 Feb 2012 Cargill International Trading Pte Ltd (Respondent)Lost	15 Feb 2012	Cargill International Trading Pte Ltd (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe Respondent's cross-appeal was dismissed. The Respondent is to pay the Applicant its costs of these proceedings here and before the Tribunal, with such costs to be taxed if not agreed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Martek v Cargill: Patent Revocation, Microbial Oil Mixtures, and Infant Formula Supplementation 28 Mar 2011 Cargill International Trading Pte Ltd (Respondent)Partial	28 Mar 2011	Cargill International Trading Pte Ltd (Respondent): Cross-Appeal Dismissed in PartCross-appeal against the Tribunal’s decision in the Amendment Proceedings is dismissed, except with regard to Claim 42 and consequently Claim 45 in the Proposed 2006 Amendments. The Respondent is ordered to pay the Applicant 95% of its costs for the hearing before the Tribunal and for the appeal before the High Court (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
4	MFM Restaurants v Fish & Co: Breach of Contract & Damages Assessment 17 Oct 2010 Dickson Low (Appellant)Partial	17 Oct 2010	Dickson Low (Appellant): Appeal allowed in partAppeal allowed in part, with total damages awarded to the Respondent being SGD 193,967.38 (comprising SGD 95,649.98 for damages to be awarded during the Breach Period and SGD 98,317.40 for damages to be awarded during the Post-Breach Period). Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	Martek Biosciences Corp v Cargill: Patent Revocation Appeal - Adducing Further Evidence 02 May 2010 Cargill International Trading Pte Ltd (Respondent)Won	02 May 2010	Cargill International Trading Pte Ltd (Respondent): Costs awardedCosts of $5,500 (inclusive of disbursements) to be paid by the Applicant to the Respondents as costs of this application. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Wu Yang v Mao Yong Hui: Mareva Injunctions, Shares Allotment & Companies Act Breach 12 Dec 2007 Wu Yang Construction Group Ltd (Appellant, Plaintiff)Lost	12 Dec 2007	Wu Yang Construction Group Ltd (Appellant, Plaintiff): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	Trek Technology v Ritronics Components: Interrogatories in Assessment of Damages 11 Dec 2006 Ritronics Components (S'pore) Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent)Won	11 Dec 2006	Ritronics Components (S'pore) Pte Ltd (Defendant, Respondent): Order of Assistant Registrar affirmedThe Assistant Registrar's order directing that the interrogatories issued by the plaintiff be withdrawn was affirmed.