Stephen King Chang-Min
Stephen King Chang-Min is a individual in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 2 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 2 counsels. Through 2 law firms. They have been involved in 2 complex cases, representing 100.0% of their total caseload.
Legal Representation
Stephen King Chang-Min has been represented by 2 law firms and 2 counsels.
Law Firm | Cases Handled |
---|---|
WongPartnership LLP | 1 case |
Cheng | 1 case |
Case Complexity Analysis
Analysis of Stephen King Chang-Min's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.
Complexity Overview
- Average Parties per Case
- 7.0
- Complex Cases
- 2 (100.0%)
- Cases with more than 3 parties
Complexity by Case Type
Type | Cases |
---|---|
Neutral | 17.0 parties avg |
Partial | 17.0 parties avg |
Complexity Trends Over Time
Year | Cases |
---|---|
2009 | 17.0 parties avg |
2008 | 17.0 parties avg |
Case Outcome Analytics
Analysis of Stephen King Chang-Min's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.
Outcome Distribution
Outcome Type | Cases |
---|---|
Neutral | 1(50.0%) |
Partial | 1(50.0%) |
Yearly Outcome Trends
Year | Total Cases |
---|---|
2009 | 1 1 |
2008 | 1 1 |
Case History
Displaying all 2 cases
Case | Role | Outcome |
---|---|---|
06 Jan 2009 | Defendant | PartialWith regard to the documents disclosed by the second to fourth defendants, the court considered whether they satisfied the test of discovery in S 668/2006, specifically the third party proceedings therein. The court ordered a release of the implied undertaking in respect of these documents and granted leave for them to be used in S 668/2006. In respect of some other remaining documents, the court was not satisfied as to their relevance in S 668/2006, nor could the court see how these documents would advance the case of the Sers in the third party proceedings in that suit. The Ser’s application in relation to these remaining documents was therefore disallowed. |
12 Feb 2008 | Defendant | NeutralThe judgment does not specify an outcome for this party. |