Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd

Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 5 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 4 counsels. Through 3 law firms. Their track record shows a 60.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have been involved in 5 complex cases, representing 100.0% of their total caseload.

Legal Representation

Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd has been represented by 3 law firms and 4 counsels.

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case
8.6
Complex Cases
5 (100.0%)
Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

TypeCases
Lost19.0 parties avg
Neutral18.0 parties avg
Won38.7 parties avg

Complexity Trends Over Time

YearCases
202119.0 parties avg
202029.0 parties avg
201918.0 parties avg
201818.0 parties avg

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome TypeCases
Lost1(20.0%)
Neutral1(20.0%)
Won3(60.0%)

Monetary Outcomes

CurrencyAverage
SGD0.002 cases
USD70,006,122.491 cases

Yearly Outcome Trends

YearTotal Cases
20211
1
20201
2
20191
1
20181
1

Case History

Displaying all 5 cases

CaseRoleOutcome
25 Mar 2021
RespondentLostThe first to seventh respondents were ordered to be jointly and severally liable to the appellant for the total sum of US$70,006,122.49 and S$131,817.80. Assumed USD as the judgment refers to USD amounts.
31 May 2020
RespondentWonApplication to reinstate Mareva injunction against Cougar Pacific Pte Ltd dismissed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
11 Feb 2020
DefendantWonJudgment for the Defendant; plaintiff's claims dismissed. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the jurisdiction is Singapore.
31 Jan 2019
DefendantNeutralNo specific outcome for this party is mentioned in the judgment extract.
22 Feb 2018
DefendantWonDefendant's application to set aside the Mareva injunction was allowed.