Lee Hiok Tng

Lee Hiok Tng is a individual in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 3 counsels. Through 2 law firms. They have been involved in 1 complex case, representing 50.0% of their total caseload.

Legal Representation

Lee Hiok Tng has been represented by 2 law firms and 3 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Wee Tay & Lim	1 case	Foo Say Tun Yang Tze Ching Valerie
Tan & Lim	1 case	Malcom Lim

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Lee Hiok Tng's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.0
Complex Cases: 1 (50.0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	24.0 parties avg	4.0	100.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2001	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2000	15.0 parties avg	5.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Lee Hiok Tng's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(100.0%)	100.0%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2001	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2000	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2001-sgca-26 17 Apr 2001	17 Apr 2001	Appellant	LostAppeal dismissed with costs to the 3rd to 5th respondents. The court found that the doctrine of res judicata applied to the reimbursement question, but not to the gift question. However, the court found the gift to be invalid on its merits. No monetary amount was specified.
2	2000-sghc-192 21 Sep 2000	21 Sep 2000	Plaintiff, Defendant	LostPlaintiffs' application was dismissed with costs. The court ordered that the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs bear the Interveners’ costs herein personally and that the Estate of Nam should not be burdened with these costs as these proceedings were an abuse of the process of the court. I further made no order as to costs between the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs and the Defendant for obvious reasons. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.