PT Dianlia Setyamukti

PT Dianlia Setyamukti is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 4 counsels. Through 2 law firms. Their track record shows a 33.3% success rate in resolved cases.

Legal Representation

PT Dianlia Setyamukti has been represented by 2 law firms and 4 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Kenneth Tan Partnership	1 case	Kenneth Tan Soh Wei Chi
Ng Chong & Hue LLC	1 case	Kenneth Tan Toh Chen Han Soh Wei Chi Ng Soon Kai

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of PT Dianlia Setyamukti's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 3.0
Complex Cases: 0 (0.0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	13.0 parties avg	3.0	33.3%
Neutral	13.0 parties avg	3.0	33.3%
Won	13.0 parties avg	3.0	33.3%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2007	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2006	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2005	13.0 parties avg	3.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of PT Dianlia Setyamukti's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(33.3%)	33.3%
Neutral	1(33.3%)	33.3%
Won	1(33.3%)	33.3%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2007	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2006	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2005	1 1	Neutral: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2007-sghc-153 20 Sep 2007	20 Sep 2007	Defendant	WonBeckkett's claim against PT Dianlia Setyamukti was dismissed.
2	2006-sghc-243 28 Dec 2006	28 Dec 2006	Defendant	LostThe court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend its reply to the second defendant's defence.
3	2005-sghc-79 21 Apr 2005	21 Apr 2005	Defendant	NeutralNo specific outcome was mentioned for PT Dianlia Setyamukti in this appeal. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.