Leading Constitutional Law Lawyers & Firms by Reported Cases — Singapore
19 reported cases · May 2023 to May 2026
Updated
What did Singapore courts decide in Constitutional Law?
Singapore courts issued 19 reported Constitutional Law judgments between 2023–2026, most in SGHC (10), of the 3 with a parseable operative disposition, the most common was Application dismissed (2). This is a descriptive summary of what the courts recorded in reported decisions, not legal advice.
Compiled from 19 reported Constitutional Law judgments published on eLitigation. Counts and figures are derived from the judgments themselves; the Attorney-General's Chambers is excluded from the counsel and firm counts as the public prosecutor.
Outcome data updated
Across 19 reported Constitutional Law judgments in Singapore courts (May 2023 to May 2026), Attorney-General's Chambers is the most active firm by reported case count (17 cases), J Jayaletchmi is the most active lawyer (4 case appearances). This ranks named firms and lawyers by how often they appear in reported decisions — a descriptive count of activity, not an assessment of quality or standing.
Overview
Constitutional Law appears in 19 reported Singapore judgments (2023–2026). The most common sub-topics are Equal protection of the law (7), Fundamental liberties — Right to life and personal liberty (6) and Equality before the law (4). The most active judge by reported case count is Tay Yong Kwang (6 cases) and the most active firm is Attorney-General's Chambers (17 cases).
Which law firms handle the most Constitutional Law cases in Singapore?
Attorney-General's Chambers leads in Constitutional Law with 17 cases between May 2023 and May 2026, followed by Eugene Thuraisingam LLP (2 cases) and Carson Law Chambers (2 cases). 14 firms appeared in Constitutional Law cases during this period.
Who are the leading Constitutional Law lawyers in Singapore?
J Jayaletchmi is the most active Constitutional Law lawyer in Singapore with 4 case appearances between May 2023 and May 2026, followed by Suang Wijaya (3) and Chew Shi Jun James (3).
Which judges handle the most Constitutional Law cases in Singapore?
Tay Yong Kwang has handled 6 Constitutional Law cases between May 2023 and May 2026, the most of any Singapore judge. Sundaresh Menon (5 cases) and Woo Bih Li (4 cases) are also among the most active.
How many Constitutional Law cases are reported in Singapore courts?
19 reported Singapore judgments (2023–2026) involve Constitutional Law, most often decided by Tay Yong Kwang.
What are the main sub-topics in Singapore Constitutional Law cases?
The main sub-topics are Equal protection of the law (7), Fundamental liberties — Right to life and personal liberty (6) and Equality before the law (4).
Case Volume by Year
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Equal protection of the law 7 cases
Fundamental liberties — Right to life and personal liberty 6 cases
Equality before the law 4 cases
Judicial review 3 cases
Attorney-General — Prosecutorial discretion 2 cases
Judicial review — Leave 1 case
Fundamental liberties — Equality before the law 1 case
Judicial review — Exhaustion of remedies 1 case
Judicial review — Whether the Official Assignee’s actions are susceptible to judicial review 1 case
Equal protection of the law — Whether s 106A of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) infringed Article 12 of the Constitution 1 case
Fundamental liberties — Right to life and personal liberty — Whether s 106A of the Criminal Procedure Code Cap (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) infringed Article 9 of the Constitution 1 case
Constitution — Interpretation 1 case
Natural Justice — Principles of natural justice 1 case
Fundamental Liberties — Right to life and personal liberty 1 case
Fundamental liberties — Freedom of expression 1 case
Fundamental liberties — Right to counsel 1 case
Natural justice — Bias 1 case
Fundamental liberties — Freedom of speech 1 case
Key Statutes
Court Distribution
Cases
Methodology & disclaimer
Firms and lawyers are ranked by the number of reported Supreme Court judgments they appear in, published on eLitigation. Counts reflect appearances in reported decisions only — unreported matters, settlements, and advisory work are not included. This is a descriptive count of activity by reported case volume, not an assessment of quality or standing, and not an endorsement or recommendation of any firm or lawyer. It is information, not legal advice.