Mona Computer Systems (S) Pte Ltd
Mona Computer Systems (S) Pte Ltd is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 4 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 4 counsels. Through 1 law firm.
Legal Representation
Mona Computer Systems (S) Pte Ltd has been represented by 1 law firm and 4 counsels.
Law Firm | Cases Handled |
---|---|
Kalamohan & Co | 4 cases |
Case Complexity Analysis
Analysis of Mona Computer Systems (S) Pte Ltd's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.
Complexity Overview
- Average Parties per Case
- 2.5
- Complex Cases
- 0 (0.0%)
- Cases with more than 3 parties
Complexity by Case Type
Type | Cases |
---|---|
Partial | 42.5 parties avg |
Complexity Trends Over Time
Year | Cases |
---|---|
2014 | 12.0 parties avg |
2013 | 12.0 parties avg |
2012 | 13.0 parties avg |
2010 | 13.0 parties avg |
Case Outcome Analytics
Analysis of Mona Computer Systems (S) Pte Ltd's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.
Outcome Distribution
Outcome Type | Cases |
---|---|
Partial | 4(100.0%) |
Monetary Outcomes
Currency | Average |
---|---|
SGD | 121,396.793 cases |
Yearly Outcome Trends
Year | Total Cases |
---|---|
2014 | 1 1 |
2013 | 1 1 |
2012 | 1 1 |
2010 | 1 1 |
Case History
Displaying all 4 cases
Case | Role | Outcome |
---|---|---|
19 Mar 2014 | Plaintiff, Respondent | PartialAppeal dismissed regarding director's fees but allowed in part regarding interest on the judgment debt (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore). |
26 Nov 2013 | Appellant | PartialAppeal allowed in part, restoring the decision of the Assistant Registrar that the $316,065.37 received by the Respondent from MN as commissions be accounted to the Appellant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore. |
15 Nov 2012 | Plaintiff, Respondent | PartialMurugan to account for director's fees of $48,125 (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore). |
15 Sep 2010 | Plaintiff | PartialPlaintiff's claim against D2 for breach of fiduciary duty was successful. Plaintiff's claim against D1 was dismissed. |