Chee Yoh Chuang

Chee Yoh Chuang is a individual in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 6 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 13 counsels. Through 4 law firms. Their track record shows a 100.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have been involved in 3 complex cases, representing 50.0% of their total caseload.

Legal Representation

Chee Yoh Chuang has been represented by 4 law firms and 13 counsels.

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Chee Yoh Chuang's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case
3.8
Complex Cases
3 (50.0%)
Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

TypeCases
Won63.8 parties avg

Complexity Trends Over Time

YearCases
202214.0 parties avg
202123.5 parties avg
202023.0 parties avg
201416.0 parties avg

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Chee Yoh Chuang's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome TypeCases
Won6(100.0%)

Monetary Outcomes

CurrencyAverage
SGD7,500.004 cases

Yearly Outcome Trends

YearTotal Cases
20221
1
20211
2
20201
2
20141
1

Case History

Displaying all 6 cases

CaseRoleOutcome
20 Mar 2022
Respondent, Plaintiff, DefendantWonJudgment in favor of Chee Yoh Chuang. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
11 Jul 2021
Plaintiff, RespondentWonApplication in Originating Summons No 89 granted. Rothstar was ordered to pay the costs of OS 87 fixed at $12,000 inclusive of disbursements and the costs of OS 89 and OS 78 fixed at $20,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
27 May 2021
RespondentWonApplication for ratification dismissed.
23 Aug 2020
RespondentWonRespondents awarded costs in the amount of $30,000 (all-in). Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
18 Feb 2020
ApplicantWonApplication for sale of property granted.
25 Feb 2014
AppellantWonThe court allowed the appeal and directed that the Singapore Liquidators of Beluga Chartering were at liberty to remit the company’s assets in Singapore to the German Liquidator subject to any deductions authorised or required under the Act, notwithstanding the existence of the Singapore Subsidiaries’ unsatisfied judgment debt.