Tan Huat Chye

Tan Huat Chye is a individual in Singapore's legal system. The party has been involved in 9 cases in Singapore's courts. Represented by 13 counsels. Through 5 law firms. Their track record shows a 44.4% success rate in resolved cases. They have been involved in 9 complex cases, representing 100.0% of their total caseload.

Legal Representation

Tan Huat Chye has been represented by 5 law firms and 13 counsels.

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Tan Huat Chye's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case
9.3
Complex Cases
9 (100.0%)
Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

TypeCases
Dismissed19.0 parties avg
Lost211.0 parties avg
Neutral19.0 parties avg
Partial19.0 parties avg
Won48.8 parties avg

Complexity Trends Over Time

YearCases
202119.0 parties avg
202019.0 parties avg
2019111.0 parties avg
201819.0 parties avg
2015111.0 parties avg
2012111.0 parties avg
200918.0 parties avg
200818.0 parties avg
200418.0 parties avg

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Tan Huat Chye's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome TypeCases
Dismissed1(11.1%)
Lost2(22.2%)
Neutral1(11.1%)
Partial1(11.1%)
Won4(44.4%)

Monetary Outcomes

CurrencyAverage
SGD140,375.004 cases

Yearly Outcome Trends

YearTotal Cases
20211
1
20201
1
20191
1
20181
1
20151
1
20121
1
20091
1
20081
1
20041
1

Case History

Displaying all 9 cases

CaseRoleOutcome
10 Feb 2021
DefendantDismissedPlaintiffs' claims against Huat Chye dismissed.
29 Jul 2020
DefendantNeutralNo specific outcome mentioned for this party. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
14 Mar 2019
DefendantLostLiable for costs of $435,500 jointly and severally (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
21 Nov 2018
AppellantPartialThe appellant was jointly and severally liable to pay damages in the amount of $1,338,312.50 and costs of $126,000 (inclusive of disbursements) for Civil Appeal No 171 of 2015 and the related summonses. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
05 Aug 2015
DefendantLostConsent Order set aside.
11 Nov 2012
DefendantWonThe defendant prevailed in the action to set aside the Consent Order (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
11 Feb 2009
DefendantWonDefendant's application to proceed with the bidding process for the shares was granted.
22 Jun 2008
DefendantWonThe plaintiffs' application for further orders and/or clarification and/or variation of the consent order was dismissed.
23 Feb 2004
DefendantWonPrayers (1) – (3) of SIC 5864 of 2003 were allowed.