Leading Tort Lawyers & Firms by Reported Cases — Singapore
178 reported cases · January 2023 to October 2026
Updated
What did Singapore courts decide in Tort?
Singapore courts issued 178 reported Tort judgments between 2023–2026, most in SGHC (101), of the 53 with a parseable operative disposition, the most common was Claim dismissed (31), the median monetary award recorded was $41,250. This is a descriptive summary of what the courts recorded in reported decisions, not legal advice.
Compiled from 178 reported Tort 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 178 reported Tort judgments in Singapore courts (January 2023 to October 2026), Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP is the most active firm by reported case count (16 cases), Tan Seng Chew Richard is the most active lawyer (5 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
Tort appears in 178 reported Singapore judgments (2023–2026). The most common sub-topics are Misrepresentation — Fraud and deceit (29), Conspiracy (26) and Misrepresentation — Negligent misrepresentation (19). The most active judge by reported case count is Steven Chong (10 cases) and the most active firm is Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP (16 cases).
Which law firms handle the most Tort cases in Singapore?
Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP leads in Tort with 16 cases between January 2023 and October 2026, followed by Drew & Napier LLC (14 cases) and Allen & Gledhill LLP (11 cases). 200 firms appeared in Tort cases during this period.
Who are the leading Tort lawyers in Singapore?
Tan Seng Chew Richard is the most active Tort lawyer in Singapore with 5 case appearances between January 2023 and October 2026, followed by Lok Vi Ming (4) and Lin Hui Yin Sharon (4).
Which judges handle the most Tort cases in Singapore?
Steven Chong has handled 10 Tort cases between January 2023 and October 2026, the most of any Singapore judge. Chiah Kok Khun (9 cases) and Hri Kumar Nair (8 cases) are also among the most active.
How many Tort cases are reported in Singapore courts?
178 reported Singapore judgments (2023–2026) involve Tort, most often decided by Steven Chong.
What are the main sub-topics in Singapore Tort cases?
The main sub-topics are Misrepresentation — Fraud and deceit (29), Conspiracy (26) and Misrepresentation — Negligent misrepresentation (19).
Case Volume by Year
Key Issues & Sub-Topics
Misrepresentation — Fraud and deceit 29 cases
Conspiracy 26 cases
Misrepresentation — Negligent misrepresentation 19 cases
Negligence — Breach of duty 13 cases
Negligence 11 cases
Negligence — Duty of care 11 cases
Inducement of breach of contract 11 cases
Defamation — Justification 8 cases
Conspiracy — Unlawful means conspiracy 8 cases
Negligence — Causation 8 cases
Conversion 7 cases
Defamation — Qualified privilege 7 cases
Vicarious liability 6 cases
Defamation — Publication 6 cases
Negligence — Contributory negligence 5 cases
Defamation — Defamatory statements 4 cases
Defamation — Damages 4 cases
Defamation — Fair comment 4 cases
Conspiracy — Lawful means conspiracy 4 cases
Detinue 3 cases
Negligence — Damages 3 cases
Breach of statutory duty — Duties imposed by statute 3 cases
Conspiracy — Combination 3 cases
Misrepresentation 3 cases
Negligence — Breach of Duty 2 cases
Trespass — Land 2 cases
Malicious falsehood 2 cases
Defamation — Malice 2 cases
Unlawful means conspiracy 2 cases
Key Statutes
Guides & Data
Court Distribution
Cases
Page 1 of 8Methodology & 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.