Paris Investment Pte Ltd

Paris Investment Pte Ltd is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 8 counsels. Through 1 law firm. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have been involved in 2 complex cases, representing 100.0% of their total caseload.

Legal Representation

Paris Investment Pte Ltd has been represented by 1 law firm and 8 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Drew & Napier LLC	1 case	Jaikanth Shankar Tan Ruo Yu Davinder Singh Charlene Wong Su-Yi Davinder Singh s/o Amar Singh Lydia Ni Manchuo Deborah Loh Yu Chin Serena Ng Su-Lin

Case Complexity Analysis

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

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.0
Complex Cases: 2 (100.0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	14.0 parties avg	4.0	50.0%
Won	14.0 parties avg	4.0	50.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2018	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2017	14.0 parties avg	4.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

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

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	50,000.00	25,000.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2018	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2018-sgca-47 28 Aug 2018	28 Aug 2018	Respondent	LostAppeal dismissed. The respondents are to pay costs fixed at $50,000 inclusive of disbursements in favour of Wellness for the appeal. The costs order below is reversed in favour of Wellness. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
2	2017-sghc-298 15 Nov 2017	15 Nov 2017	Defendant	WonThe application to appoint a director was dismissed in favor of the defendant. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the jurisdiction is Singapore.