Chief Assessor

Chief Assessor is a government agency in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 20 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 17 counsels. Through 2 law firms. Their track record shows a 75.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Legal Representation

Chief Assessor has been represented by 2 law firms and 17 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (Law Division)	1 case	Liu Hern Kuan Pang Mei Yu Quek Hui Ling Chong Wai Teng Victoria Leung Yew Kwong
Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore	3 cases	Liu Hern Kuan Pang Mei Yu Rajiv Rai Sonia Khoo Meng Quek Hui Ling Shawn Joo Jian Hua Lau Kai Lee Julia Mohamed Foo Hui Min Ong Ken Loon Joyce Chee Alvin Chia Joanna Yap Ong Keng Loon Tham Siok Peng

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Chief Assessor's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.3
Complex Cases: 0 (0.0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	32.3 parties avg	2.3	15.0%
Partial	22.5 parties avg	2.5	10.0%
Won	152.3 parties avg	2.3	75.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2021	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2020	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2019	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2013	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2012	22.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2008	42.5 parties avg	2.5
2007	52.2 parties avg	2.2
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2005	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2002	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(15.0%)	15.0%
Partial	2(10.0%)	10.0%
Won	15(75.0%)	75.0%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	4,596,000.00	306,400.0015 cases	15

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2021	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2019	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2013	1 2	Won: 2 cases (200.0%)
2012	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2011	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	3 112	Lost: 1 cases (33.3%) Partial: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2007	2 14	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 4 cases (200.0%)
2006	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2002	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 20 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2021-sghc-233 14 Oct 2021	14 Oct 2021	Respondent	WonThe Chief Assessor's decision regarding the annual value of the property was upheld.
2	2020-sghc-10 15 Jan 2020	15 Jan 2020	Appellant	WonThe Chief Assessor's appeal was allowed, meaning the wind tunnel is not exempt from property tax.
3	2019-sghc-95 15 Apr 2019	15 Apr 2019	Respondent	WonThe Chief Assessor's valuation of the property was upheld. Costs of the appeal were awarded to the Chief Assessor, such costs to be taxed if not agreed within two weeks from the order. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
4	2013-sgca-30 24 Apr 2013	24 Apr 2013	Appellant	WonThe appeal was allowed with costs and the usual consequential orders.
5	2013-sgca-4 16 Jan 2013	16 Jan 2013	Respondent	WonJudgment in favor of the Chief Assessor. The court determined that the depreciation component should be included in the annual value of each unit. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	2012-sghc-183 04 Sep 2012	04 Sep 2012	Respondent	LostThe appeal was dismissed and the Chief Assessor is liable for costs. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
7	2012-sghc-120 03 Jun 2012	03 Jun 2012	Applicant	WonChief Assessor's appeal was allowed with costs.
8	2011-sghc-31 10 Feb 2011	10 Feb 2011	Defendant, Respondent	WonJudgment for the Respondent. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
9	2008-sgca-43 27 Oct 2008	27 Oct 2008	Respondent	PartialThe Chief Assessor's decision to include the special levy in the annual value was upheld, but the issue relating to the sinking fund was remitted back for determination.
10	2008-sgca-29 09 Jul 2008	09 Jul 2008	Respondent	WonThe Chief Assessor's decision was upheld; the appeal was dismissed.
11	2008-sgca-21 19 May 2008	19 May 2008	Respondent	WonAppeal dismissed with costs. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
12	2008-sgca-15 26 Mar 2008	26 Mar 2008	Appellant	LostThe appeal to include the cooling machinery and pipelines in the property tax assessment was dismissed.
13	2007-sghc-227 26 Dec 2007	26 Dec 2007	Respondent	WonJudgment for the Chief Assessor; City Developments Ltd's appeal was dismissed with costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
14	2007-sghc-210 04 Dec 2007	04 Dec 2007	Respondent	WonThe Chief Assessor's decision was upheld. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
15	2007-sghc-82 24 May 2007	24 May 2007	Respondent	PartialAppeal against the VRB’s decision upholding the inclusion of the machinery and pipelines in the assessment of the subject property is allowed but the appeal against the use of the contractor's test method is dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
16	2007-sgca-15 08 Mar 2007	08 Mar 2007	Respondent	WonThe appeal was dismissed in favour of the Chief Assessor.
17	2007-sghc-21 07 Feb 2007	07 Feb 2007	Respondent	WonThe court upheld the annual value of $4,596,000 assessed by the respondent. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
18	2006-sghc-133 24 Jul 2006	24 Jul 2006	Respondent	WonThe Chief Assessor's decision to refuse the deduction of advertising and promotion expenses was upheld.
19	2005-sghc-219 28 Nov 2005	28 Nov 2005	Respondent	WonMotion dismissed with costs to be paid by the Management Corporation Strata Title Plan Nos 1298 and 1304. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
20	2002-sghc-205 01 Sep 2002	01 Sep 2002	Respondent	LostThe appeal against the Chief Assessor's decision was initially dismissed by the Valuation Review Board, but the High Court overturned this decision. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.