Charles Lin

Charles Lin is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2003 to 2017. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 3 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in civil practice and medical malpractice. Their track record shows a 33.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Charles Lin has demonstrated expertise across 23 primary practice areas, with significant experience in contract law and civil practice.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Contract Law	2 cases	8% of total caseload	General Practice45% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 8% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Medical Malpractice	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Negligence	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Medical Ethics	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Shipping Law	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Professional conduct	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Formation of contract	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Medical Negligence	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Damages	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Assessment of Damages	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Evidence	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Summary Judgement	1 cases	4% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Informed consent	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Gynaecology	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Pure Economic Loss	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Solicitors' Undertakings	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Negligent design and manufacture	1 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Charles Lin has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Charles Lin has been affiliated with 3 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 1 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
MyintSoe & Selvaraj	1 cases	33% of cases	Jen Shek Wei v Singapore Medical Council: Appeal Against Disciplinary Tribunal's Decision on Professional Misconduct(Nov 2017)
Donaldson & Burkinshaw	1 cases	33% of cases	P.T. Bumi v Man B&W: Negligent Engine Design & Pure Economic Loss(Jul 2003)
Donaldson and Burkinshaw	1 cases	33% of cases	PT Bumi v Man B&W: Solicitors' Undertakings & Security for Costs in Foreign Plaintiff Cases(May 2004)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Charles Lin's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.8
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	22.7 parties avg	2.7	67%
Won	13.0 parties avg	3.0	33%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2003	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2004	13.0 parties avg	3.0
2017	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Charles Lin's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	2(67%)	67%
Won	1(33%)	33%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
USD	5,959,179.35	5,959,179.351 cases	1

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2003	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2004	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Jen Shek Wei v Singapore Medical Council: Appeal Against Disciplinary Tribunal's Decision on Professional Misconduct 12 Nov 2017 JEN SHEK WEI (Applicant)Lost	12 Nov 2017	JEN SHEK WEI (Applicant): Appeal DismissedDr. Jen's appeal against the Disciplinary Tribunal's decision was dismissed.
2	PT Bumi v Man B&W: Solicitors' Undertakings & Security for Costs in Foreign Plaintiff Cases 13 May 2004 Mirrlees Blackstone (S.E Asia) Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant)Won	13 May 2004	Mirrlees Blackstone (S.E Asia) Pte Ltd (Defendant, Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe defendants' appeal against the order discharging the undertakings was allowed.
3	P.T. Bumi v Man B&W: Negligent Engine Design & Pure Economic Loss 17 Jul 2003 Mirrlees Blackstone Ltd (Defendant)Lost	17 Jul 2003	Mirrlees Blackstone Ltd (Defendant): Damages AwardedDamages awarded against the defendant in the amount of US$2,979,589.675. Assumed USD, as the judgment involves international companies and monetary amounts are specified in USD.