Rosman bin Abdullah
Rosman bin Abdullah is a individual in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 11 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 11 counsels. Through 8 law firms. They have been involved in 8 complex cases, representing 72.7% of their total caseload.
Legal Representation
Rosman bin Abdullah has been represented by 8 law firms and 11 counsels.
| Law Firm | Cases Handled |
|---|---|
| Tito Isaac & Co LLP | 1 case |
| Cavenagh Law LLP | 1 case |
| K Ravi Law Corporation | 1 case |
| K K Cheng Law LLC | 3 cases |
| KK Cheng Law LLC | 1 case |
| DSCT Law Corporation | 1 case |
| Eldan Law LLP | 1 case |
| ADTvance Law LLC | 1 case |
Case Complexity Analysis
Analysis of Rosman bin Abdullah's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.
Complexity Overview
- Average Parties per Case
- 18.9
- Complex Cases
- 8 (72.7%)
- Cases with more than 3 parties
Complexity by Case Type
| Type | Cases |
|---|---|
| Lost | 1118.9 parties avg |
Complexity Trends Over Time
| Year | Cases |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 132.0 parties avg |
| 2024 | 137.0 parties avg |
| 2023 | 137.0 parties avg |
| 2022 | 321.3 parties avg |
| 2021 | 216.0 parties avg |
| 2016 | 12.0 parties avg |
| 2015 | 12.0 parties avg |
| 2010 | 12.0 parties avg |
Case Outcome Analytics
Analysis of Rosman bin Abdullah's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.
Outcome Distribution
| Outcome Type | Cases |
|---|---|
| Lost | 11(100.0%) |
Monetary Outcomes
| Currency | Average |
|---|---|
| SGD | 10,000.003 cases |
Yearly Outcome Trends
| Year | Total Cases |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 1 1 |
| 2024 | 1 1 |
| 2023 | 1 1 |
| 2022 | 1 3 |
| 2021 | 1 2 |
| 2016 | 1 1 |
| 2015 | 1 1 |
| 2010 | 1 1 |
Case History
Displaying all 11 cases
| Case | Role | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
04 Feb 2025 | Applicant | LostApplication dismissed due to lack of standing and no reasonable cause of action. |
26 Mar 2024 | Appellant, Applicant | LostAppeal dismissed due to lack of standing. |
04 Dec 2023 | Applicant | LostApplication dismissed for lack of standing and no reasonable cause of action. |
03 Aug 2022 | Appellant, Claimant | LostThe appeal against the decision to strike out the originating claim was dismissed. |
22 Jun 2022 | Plaintiff | LostCosts of the three applications, fixed at $20,000, are to be borne personally by Mr Cheng and Mr Ravi jointly and severally. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore. |
11 May 2022 | Plaintiff | LostCosts of OS 1025 and SUM 4742 fixed at $10,000 and reasonable disbursements, to be paid to the Attorney-General (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore). |
01 Dec 2021 | Plaintiff | LostThe plaintiff's claim was dismissed. |
29 Nov 2021 | Plaintiff | LostCosts of the OS to be borne by counsel personally instead of the plaintiff. |
20 Nov 2016 | Appellant | LostAppeal dismissed, death sentence affirmed. |
02 Nov 2015 | Applicant | LostThe re-sentencing application was dismissed, and the death sentence was affirmed. |
13 Sep 2010 | Defendant | LostAccused was convicted of trafficking diamorphine and sentenced to death. |