City Developments Ltd

City Developments Ltd is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 8 counsels. Through 3 law firms. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have been involved in 1 complex case, representing 25.0% of their total caseload.

Legal Representation

City Developments Ltd has been represented by 3 law firms and 8 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Allen & Gledhill LLP	1 case	Kenneth Pereira Rajaram Muralli Raja Tham Wei Chern Tan Kai Liang Faith Boey
WongPartnership LLP	1 case	Tan Kay Kheng Tan Shao Tong
Wong Partnership	1 case	Tan Kay Kheng Teo Lay Khoon

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of City Developments Ltd's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.8
Complex Cases: 1 (25.0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	22.0 parties avg	2.0	50.0%
Won	23.5 parties avg	3.5	50.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2013	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2008	23.5 parties avg	3.5
2007	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of City Developments Ltd's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(50.0%)	50.0%
Won	2(50.0%)	50.0%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	20,000.00	6,666.673 cases	3

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2013	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2008	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2007	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2013-sghc-61 13 Mar 2013	13 Mar 2013	Respondent	WonAppeal dismissed; City Developments Ltd was awarded $20,000 in costs plus reasonable disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	2008-sghc-237 21 Dec 2008	21 Dec 2008	Plaintiff	WonThe court held that the plaintiff was entitled to the plot by adverse possession.
3	2008-sgca-29 09 Jul 2008	09 Jul 2008	Appellant	LostAppeal against the decision of the judge below was dismissed with costs.
4	2007-sghc-227 26 Dec 2007	26 Dec 2007	Appellant	LostAppeal dismissed with costs to the Chief Assessor (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).