Woo Bih Li

Woo Bih Li is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2000 to 2000. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in banking law and documentary credits. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Woo Bih Li has demonstrated expertise across 12 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	3 cases	20% of total caseload	Experienced55% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 20% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	13% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Documentary Credits	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Strata Titles	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Management Corporation	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Arbitration	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Defective Construction	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Woo Bih Li has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Woo Bih Li has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 1 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Bih Li & Lee	1 cases	33% of cases	MCST Plan No 1938 v Goodview Properties: Strata Titles, Management Corporation & Defective Common Property(Apr 2000)
Donaldson & Burkinshaw	1 cases	33% of cases	Lum Chang v Anderson Land: Challenging Arbitration Award Under Section 22 of the Arbitration Act(Apr 2000)
Bih Lih & Lee	1 cases	33% of cases	Banque Nationale v Credit Agricole: Letter of Credit Dispute over Negotiation vs. Deferred Payment(Jun 2000)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Woo Bih Li's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.0
Complex Cases: 1 (33%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	22.5 parties avg	2.5	67%
Won	14.0 parties avg	4.0	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2000	33.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Woo Bih Li's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(67%)	67%
Won	1(33%)	33%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2000	3 21	Lost: 2 cases (66.7%) Won: 1 cases (33.3%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Banque Nationale v Credit Agricole: Letter of Credit Dispute over Negotiation vs. Deferred Payment 26 Jun 2000 Banque Nationale de Paris (Plaintiff)Won	26 Jun 2000	Banque Nationale de Paris (Plaintiff): Claim allowedPlaintiff's claim was allowed. The judgment does not specify a currency, so USD is assumed as the currency of the underlying transaction.
2	MCST Plan No 1938 v Goodview Properties: Strata Titles, Management Corporation & Defective Common Property 27 Apr 2000 Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 1938 (Plaintiff, Appellant)Lost	27 Apr 2000	Management Corporation Strata Title Plan No 1938 (Plaintiff, Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs of $4,000 to be paid to the defendants (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	Lum Chang v Anderson Land: Challenging Arbitration Award Under Section 22 of the Arbitration Act 04 Apr 2000 Lum Chang Building Contractors Pte Ltd (Appellant)Lost	04 Apr 2000	Lum Chang Building Contractors Pte Ltd (Appellant): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; no extension of time granted to file an application to set aside the award.