Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited

Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 22 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 39 counsels. Through 9 law firms. Their track record shows a 59.1% success rate in resolved cases. They have been involved in 10 complex cases, representing 45.5% of their total caseload.

Legal Representation

Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited has been represented by 9 law firms and 39 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Rajah & Tann LLP	2 cases	Lee Eng Beng Sim Kwan Kiat Raelene Pereira Nigel Pereira Chong Kah Kheng Low Poh Ling
Rajah & Tann	2 cases	Lee Eng Beng Ang Leong Hao Lynette Koh V K Rajah SC Chio Yuen Lyn Melissa Lee
WongPartnership LLP	1 case	Soon Wen Qi Andrea Felicia Soong Wanyi Tan Kai Yun Tan Chee Meng Manoj Pillay Sandrasegara Hudson Wong Andrew Pflug Rajan Menon Smitha Lorraine Koh Xin Yu
Shook Lin & Bok LLP	1 case	Sarjit Singh Gill Hoang Linh Trang Daniel Tan Shi Min
Allen & Gledhill LLP	1 case	Ong Boon Hwee William Abigail Fernandez Douglas Lok Bao Guang Ho Pey Yann Kenny Yap Alexander Yeo Royston Tan Chu Zheng
Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP	1 case	Toh Kian Sing Lye Yu Min Ang Leong Hao Jansen Chow Adrian Wong Chen Zhida
Hin Tat Augustine & Partners	1 case	Zikri Muzammil
Advent Law Corporation	1 case	Fah Serena
Kelvin Chia Partnership	1 case	Thio Ying Ying Cheong Aik Hock

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 5.4
Complex Cases: 10 (45.5%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Dismissed	16.0 parties avg	6.0	4.5%
Lost	24.0 parties avg	4.0	9.1%
Neutral	510.0 parties avg	10.0	22.7%
Won	133.8 parties avg	3.8	59.1%
	14.0 parties avg	4.0	4.5%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2024	49.0 parties avg	9.0
2023	28.5 parties avg	8.5
2022	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2021	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2020	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2019	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2017	212.0 parties avg	12.0
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2012	24.5 parties avg	4.5
2002	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2001	32.7 parties avg	2.7

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Dismissed	1(4.5%)	4.5%
Lost	2(9.1%)	9.1%
Neutral	5(22.7%)	22.7%
Won	13(59.1%)	59.1%
	1(4.5%)	4.5%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	7,456,973.16	932,121.658 cases	8
USD	4,973,904.64	2,486,952.322 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2024	2 31	Neutral: 3 cases (150.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2023	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2022	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2021	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)
2020	1 2	Won: 2 cases (200.0%)
2019	1 3	Won: 3 cases (300.0%)
2017	2 11	Dismissed: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2012	2 11	Lost: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2002	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2001	2 21	Won: 2 cases (100.0%) : 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 22 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2024-sghc-256 14 Oct 2024	14 Oct 2024	Non-party	NeutralThe judgment does not specify an outcome for this party.
2	2024-sgca-31 20 Aug 2024	20 Aug 2024	Respondent, Defendant	WonAppeal dismissed in favour of Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited; costs awarded (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
3	2024-sghc-98 07 Apr 2024	07 Apr 2024	Other	NeutralOversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited was a creditor of Boldtek Holdings Limited.
4	2024-sghc-58 03 Mar 2024	03 Mar 2024	Other	NeutralOversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited was present as a creditor.
5	2023-sghc-231 17 Aug 2023	17 Aug 2023	Respondent	NeutralOversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited indicated support for a six-month moratorium.
6	2023-sghc-220 17 Aug 2023	17 Aug 2023	Defendant	WonJudgment in favour of Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited as the Fraud Exception was established.
7	2022-sghcr-6 22 May 2022	22 May 2022	Plaintiff	LostThe court granted the defendant unconditional leave to defend.
8	2021-sghc-65 18 Mar 2021	18 Mar 2021	Respondent	NeutralThe judgment does not specify a win or loss for Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Limited.
9	2020-sghc-198 17 Sep 2020	17 Sep 2020	Applicant	WonThe applicant's application for interim judicial management was granted.
10	2020-sghc-116 03 Jun 2020	03 Jun 2020	Plaintiff	WonThe plaintiff's appeal was dismissed with costs.
11	2019-sghc-106 23 Apr 2019	23 Apr 2019	Plaintiff, Respondent	WonRegistrar's Appeals dismissed; summary judgment affirmed for USD 7,454,973.16, with interest of 5.33% per annum from date of writ to date of judgment. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
12	2019-sghc-88 01 Apr 2019	01 Apr 2019	Respondent	WonOriginating Summons dismissed with costs to the respondent fixed at $2,000 inclusive of disbursements. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
13	2019-sghc-45 27 Feb 2019	27 Feb 2019	Plaintiff, Defendant	WonJudgment for the Plaintiff for US$4,888,114.64 (assumed USD, as the credit facilities were in USD) plus S$25,348.23 (SGD, as the set-off amounts were in SGD).
14	2017-sghcr-7 11 May 2017	11 May 2017	Plaintiff, Applicant	DismissedSummons No 648 of 2017 is dismissed due to inadequate explanation for the delay in enforcement.
15	2017-sghc-38 01 Mar 2017	01 Mar 2017	Defendant	WonEntitled to claim proceeds from the sale of pepper stock in proportion to their contribution. (Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
16	2016-sghc-265 29 Nov 2016	29 Nov 2016	Defendant	WonSuccessfully resisted the plaintiff's application for an extension of time to appeal against the Appeal Dismissal Order.
17	2012-sgca-27 17 Apr 2012	17 Apr 2012	Respondent	LostAppeal dismissed, injunction restraining the Banks from making payment to Master Marine AS under the New Demand discharged. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
18	2012-sgca-9 30 Jan 2012	30 Jan 2012	Appellant	WonAppeal allowed; costs of appeal and the hearing below to both appellants.
19	2002-sghc-291 08 Dec 2002	08 Dec 2002	Defendant	WonJudgment in favor of the defendant; the plaintiff's claim was dismissed.
20	2001-sghc-132 12 Jun 2001	12 Jun 2001	Respondent	Unknown
21	2001-sghc-131 12 Jun 2001	12 Jun 2001	Plaintiff	WonThe court directed the liquidators to pay the bank the sum of USD85,790 being the amount that had been paid over by mistake.
22	2001-sghc-17 29 Jan 2001	29 Jan 2001	Respondents, Defendants	WonThe appeal to set aside the statutory demand was dismissed, allowing the bank to proceed with bankruptcy proceedings (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).