JFC Builders Pte Ltd

JFC Builders Pte Ltd is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 3 counsels. Through 2 law firms. Their track record shows a 75.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Legal Representation

JFC Builders Pte Ltd has been represented by 2 law firms and 3 counsels.

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case
2.0
Complex Cases
0 (0.0%)
Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

TypeCases
Lost12.0 parties avg
Won32.0 parties avg

Complexity Trends Over Time

YearCases
201612.0 parties avg
201512.0 parties avg
201222.0 parties avg

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome TypeCases
Lost1(25.0%)
Won3(75.0%)

Monetary Outcomes

CurrencyAverage
SGD0.002 cases

Yearly Outcome Trends

YearTotal Cases
20161
1
20151
1
20121
2

Case History

Displaying all 4 cases

CaseRoleOutcome
06 Nov 2016
PlaintiffLostApplication to set aside the adjudication determination was dismissed with costs fixed at $8,000 (inclusive of disbursements). The court also ordered payment out to the defendant of the sum paid into court by the plaintiff. The court ordered the plaintiff to pay to the defendant the sum of $4,534.13 as the plaintiff’s share of the adjudication costs and interest at 5.33% of the adjudicated amount of $70,865.45 from 31 May 2016 to the date of full payment of the adjudicated amount. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
11 Mar 2015
Respondent, DefendantWonThe appeal by Lioncity Construction Company Pte Ltd was dismissed.
29 Nov 2012
PlaintiffWonPlaintiff's application to set aside the adjudication determination was allowed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
07 Aug 2012
PlaintiffWonPrayer 1 of the plaintiff’s application was granted and the adjudication determination was set aside on the basis that Progress Claim No 8 had been served out of time.