Starhub Cable Vision Ltd (formerly known as Singapore Cable Vision Ltd)

Starhub Cable Vision Ltd (formerly known as Singapore Cable Vision Ltd) is a corporation in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 4 counsels. Through 1 law firm. Their track record shows a 50.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Legal Representation

Starhub Cable Vision Ltd (formerly known as Singapore Cable Vision Ltd) has been represented by 1 law firm and 4 counsels.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Counsels
Rodyk & Davidson	1 case	Low Chai Chong Philip Jeyaretnam SC Edric Pan Sun Rhu-Shi

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Starhub Cable Vision Ltd (formerly known as Singapore Cable Vision Ltd)'s case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.0
Complex Cases: 0 (0.0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Partial	12.0 parties avg	2.0	50.0%
Won	12.0 parties avg	2.0	50.0%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2007	22.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Starhub Cable Vision Ltd (formerly known as Singapore Cable Vision Ltd)'s case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

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

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.001 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2007	2 11	Partial: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 2 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Role	Outcome
1	2007-sghc-118 19 Jul 2007	19 Jul 2007	Defendant	WonThe court made orders for the plaintiff to file affidavits and for both parties to seek input from the Info-communications Development Authority of Singapore (IDA).
2	2007-sghc-119 19 Jul 2007	19 Jul 2007	Defendant, Respondent	PartialThe defendant's position was partially upheld as the plaintiff's application for extension of time to file reply affidavits was denied in part. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.