Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura

Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura is a statutory board in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 8 counsels. Through 4 law firms. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have been involved in 1 complex case, representing 50.0% of their total caseload.

Legal Representation

Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura has been represented by 4 law firms and 8 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Chen Xiaohui	1 case	Poon Guokun Nicholas Chan Xiaohui Darius
Legal Clinic LLC	1 case	Kam Su Cheun Aurill
Breakpoint LLC	1 case	Benjamin Tan Zhi Xiong
Allen & Gledhill LLP	1 case	Fay Fong Aaron Lee Jasmine Tham Edwin Tong

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura'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
Neutral	15.0 parties avg	5.0	50.0%
Won	13.0 parties avg	3.0	50.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2023	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2016	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Neutral	1(50.0%)	50.0%
Won	1(50.0%)	50.0%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2023	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2023-sghc-341 30 Nov 2023	30 Nov 2023	Respondent	NeutralMUIS was ordered to allow OETs to give evidence and make submissions on the severability of the Removal Decision as well as the Costs Decision, including but not limited to contesting the Applicant’s position that the quashing of the Removal Decision and Costs Decision could and should only be limited to him to the exclusion of the OETs.
2	2016-sghc-4 10 Jan 2016	10 Jan 2016	Plaintiff	WonThe court found in favor of the Plaintiff, granting the orders sought, namely: (a) a declaration that the Trust Properties are vested in the Plaintiff; (b) orders in respect of accounting by the Defendants and for the delivery of financial statements and other records; and (c) costs, charges and expenses of administering the Trust Properties to be paid out of the Trust Properties. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.