Credit Agricole Indosuez
Credit Agricole Indosuez is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 7 counsels. Through 2 law firms. Their track record shows a 75.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have been involved in 2 complex cases, representing 50.0% of their total caseload.
Legal Representation
Credit Agricole Indosuez has been represented by 2 law firms and 7 counsels.
Law Firm | Cases Handled |
---|---|
Rajah & Tann | 2 cases |
Allen & Gledhill | 1 case |
Case Complexity Analysis
Analysis of Credit Agricole Indosuez's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.
Complexity Overview
- Average Parties per Case
- 3.5
- Complex Cases
- 2 (50.0%)
- Cases with more than 3 parties
Complexity by Case Type
Type | Cases |
---|---|
Lost | 14.0 parties avg |
Won | 33.3 parties avg |
Complexity Trends Over Time
Year | Cases |
---|---|
2001 | 33.3 parties avg |
2000 | 14.0 parties avg |
Case Outcome Analytics
Analysis of Credit Agricole Indosuez's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.
Outcome Distribution
Outcome Type | Cases |
---|---|
Lost | 1(25.0%) |
Won | 3(75.0%) |
Monetary Outcomes
Currency | Average |
---|---|
SGD | 4,000.002 cases |
USD | 1,378,360.021 cases |
Yearly Outcome Trends
Year | Total Cases |
---|---|
2001 | 1 3 |
2000 | 1 1 |
Case History
Displaying all 4 cases
Case | Role | Outcome |
---|---|---|
25 Apr 2001 | Plaintiff | WonIntervener's application to vary the injunction was dismissed, with costs of $8,000 to be paid to the Plaintiffs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore). |
05 Apr 2001 | Appellant | WonAppeal allowed; BNP ordered to refund US$1,378,360.02 plus interest at 6% per annum from the date of receipt of the judgment sum to the date of the Court of Appeal's judgment. |
13 Feb 2001 | Appellant | WonAppeal of Credit Agricole Indosuez was allowed with costs (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore). |
26 Jun 2000 | Defendant | LostDefendant's defense was rejected, and the claim against them was successful. The judgment does not specify a currency, so USD is assumed as the currency of the underlying transaction. |