Zheng Shaokai

Zheng Shaokai is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2009 to 2022. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and res judicata. Their track record shows a 88.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 13% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated expertise across 31 primary practice areas, with significant experience in administrative law and civil procedure.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Administrative Law	5 cases	11% of total caseload	General Practice46% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 5 cases which represents 11% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	4 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced73% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Civil Litigation	4 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	3 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Family Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Res Judicata	2 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized93% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Personal Injury	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Damage	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Jurisdiction	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Striking out	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Abuse of Process	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai 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	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Judicial Review	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Vexatious litigants	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appeal	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Trademark Infringement	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Well Known Trade Marks	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Groundless threats of infringement proceedings	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Bifurcation of Proceedings	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Inherent Power of the Court	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Judicial Immunity	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Construction Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Copyrights	1 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice5% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Employment Law	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Zheng Shaokai has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Zheng Shaokai has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 6 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	6 cases	75% of cases	Lai Swee Lin Linda v Attorney-General: Vexatious Litigant Designation(Sep 2016) Lai Swee Lin Linda v Attorney-General: Vexatious Litigant Order for Abuse of Process(Oct 2015) Lai Swee Lin Linda v Attorney-General: Res Judicata & Wrongful Termination(Oct 2015)
Lee & Lee	1 cases	13% of cases	Mitac v SingTel: Trade Mark Infringement Dispute over 'Mio' Marks(Jun 2009)
Legal Aid Bureau	1 cases	13% of cases	Dai Yi Ting v Chuang Fu Yuan: Bifurcation Order in Personal Injury Case(Oct 2022)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Zheng Shaokai's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.4
Complex Cases: 1 (13%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	13%
Won	72.4 parties avg	2.4	88%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2009	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2014	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2015	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2022	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(13%)	13%
Won	7(88%)	88%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	6,000.00	857.147 cases	7

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2009	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)
2015	3 3	Won: 3 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2022	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Dai Yi Ting v Chuang Fu Yuan: Bifurcation Order in Personal Injury Case 10 Oct 2022 Chuang Fu Yuan (Defendant)Won	10 Oct 2022	Chuang Fu Yuan (Defendant): Application for bifurcation grantedDefendant's application to bifurcate the trial was granted.
2	Lai Swee Lin Linda v Attorney-General: Vexatious Litigant Designation 04 Sep 2016 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	04 Sep 2016	Attorney-General (Respondent): Application GrantedApplication to designate Ms. Lai a vexatious litigant granted; costs of $5,000 and disbursements of $2,325 awarded to the Attorney-General (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	Lai Swee Lin Linda v Attorney-General: Vexatious Litigant Order for Abuse of Process 18 Oct 2015 Attorney-General (Applicant)Won	18 Oct 2015	Attorney-General (Applicant): Application grantedThe Attorney-General's application under s 74 of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act for a vexatious litigant order against Mdm Lai was granted. The currency is assumed to be SGD, the currency of the jurisdiction.
4	Lai Swee Lin Linda v Attorney-General: Res Judicata & Wrongful Termination 18 Oct 2015 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	18 Oct 2015	Attorney-General (Respondent): Application DismissedThe respondent successfully defended against the application. No monetary amount was specified. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
5	AHQ v Attorney-General: Judicial Immunity & State Liability for Judicial Acts 21 Jun 2015 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	21 Jun 2015	Attorney-General (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentAppeals dismissed with costs in favor of the Attorney-General. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Ho Pak Kim Realty v Attorney-General: Claim for Damages for Alleged Biased Judicial Orders Dismissed 04 Sep 2014 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	04 Sep 2014	Attorney-General (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; awarded $500 in costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
7	AHQ v Attorney-General: Judicial Immunity and Government Liability for Judicial Acts 04 Sep 2014 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	04 Sep 2014	Attorney-General (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; AHQ was ordered to pay $500, inclusive of disbursements, forthwith to the Government for the appeal.
8	Mitac v SingTel: Trade Mark Infringement Dispute over 'Mio' Marks 04 Jun 2009 Mitac International Corp (Plaintiff, Appellant)Lost	04 Jun 2009	Mitac International Corp (Plaintiff, Appellant): Claims dismissedPlaintiff's claims for trade mark infringement and invalidation of defendant's trade marks were dismissed with costs to the defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.