Disputes

Disputes is a specialized practice area in Singapore's legal system. This area encompasses 3 cases from 2005 to 2023.

Leading Law Firms

Analysis of law firms specializing in Disputes, ranked by case volume and success rates.

Law FirmCases
Allen & Gledhill LLP100.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
DennisMathiew100.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Davinder Singh Chambers LLC0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
August Law Corporation0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Helmsman LLC0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Tito Issac & Co LLP100.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Wong Partnership0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Wong Thomas and Leong0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area

Notable Lawyers

Leading lawyers practicing in Disputes, ranked by case volume and success rates.

LawyerCases
Jaikanth Shankar0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Tan Hui Tsing100.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Deborah Koh Leng Hoon100.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Gregory Vijayendran0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Tan Ruo Yu0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Leong Yi-Ming100.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Prakash Pillai0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Raymond Wong0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Teo Ke-Wei Ian0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area
Tan Yong Jin Jonathan0.00% success rate1 cases33.3% of area

Recent Judgments

Displaying 3 most recent judgments out of 3 total cases

No.TitleCourtDecision DateOutcomes
1Marchand Navigation v Olam Global Agri & Sinco Shipping: Lien over Sub-Freights & Arbitration StayGeneral Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore28 Nov 2023
Marchand was entitled to exercise its lien pursuant to Clause 18 of the Charterparty dated 29 April 2022 in respect of the US$190,112 owed by Olam to Sinco.
2Rex International v Gulf Hibiscus: Stay of Proceedings & ArbitrationCourt of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore21 Oct 2019
Appeal dismissed.
3Tan Yeow Hiang Kenneth v Tan Chor Chuan: Review of Costs in Defamation ActionHigh Court09 Nov 2005
The court decided that it did not have the power to allow a further reduction on account of the failed defenses. The court also decided that, even if it were open to it to grant a reduction, no reduction ought to be allowed.