Tan Kok Quan Partnership
This page is a record of reported Singapore judgments that name Tan Kok Quan Partnership. It is not a directory listing. Names, firm names and counsel appear as they were recorded in each judgment at the time. For current lawyers and contact details, see the Legal Services Regulatory Authority directory or the firm's website.
Tan Kok Quan Partnership appears in 38 reported Singapore judgments (2023–2026), most often before the High Court.
These cases span several subject areas, most often Civil Procedure, Companies and Damages, and Tan Kok Quan Partnership acted for the respondent in 15 and the defendant in 5.
- Reported cases
- 38
- Courts
- High Court, Court of Appeal, High Court (Appellate Division), High Court Registrar
- Period
- February 2023 to February 2026
Source: derived from 38 published Singapore judgments, most recent decision .
Tan Kok Quan Partnership — Reported Cases & Litigation History
How Tan Kok Quan Partnership appeared
- Counsel for the respondent
- 15 cases
- Counsel for the defendant
- 5 cases
- Counsel for the appellant
- 4 cases
- Counsel for the claimant
- 4 cases
- Counsel for the plaintiff
- 4 cases
- Counsel for the applicant
- 2 cases
- Counsel for the third party
- 1 case
- Counsel for the non-party
- 1 case
- Counsel for the fourth and fifth defendants
- 1 case
- Counsel for the non-party
- 1 case
Recorded outcomes
- Appeal allowed in part
- 3
- Appeal dismissed
- 3
- Application allowed
- 1
- Application allowed in part
- 1
- Application dismissed
- 1
Outcome recorded for 9 of the 38 cases.
What the courts decided
-
“On 26 November 2025, we allowed AD 54, AD 55 and AD 56 in part and dismissed AD 92.”
High Court (Appellate Division) · 3 February 2026 · [2026] SGHC(A) 4 · Counsel for the appellant · Appeal allowed in part -
“…we allowed the Appeal in part and granted a contractual ASI restraining the continuation of the DIMA Claim in the Hong Kong Proceedings prior to the satisfaction of the pre-conditions to litigation as set out in the MTDR Clause of the DIMA.”
High Court (Appellate Division) · 21 July 2025 · [2025] SGHC(A) 10 · Counsel for the respondent · Appeal allowed in part -
“The appeal was accordingly dismissed.”
Court of Appeal · 30 April 2025 · [2025] SGCA 20 · Counsel for the appellant · Appeal dismissed -
“For all the reasons above, I allow the Application, including the Ancillary Orders sought.”
High Court · 25 March 2024 · [2024] SGHC 84 · Counsel for the plaintiff · Application allowed -
“…we dismissed the appeal with costs awarded in favour of the respondents in the aggregate sum of $30,000 all-in.”
Court of Appeal · 22 March 2024 · [2024] SGCA 9 · Counsel for the appellant · Appeal dismissed -
“We therefore dismiss the application in part and make the following orders:(a) Prayer 2 of SUM 36 (ie, the Discharge Order) is granted.”
Court of Appeal · 14 February 2024 · [2024] SGCA 4 · Counsel for the applicant · Application allowed in part
What areas of law does Tan Kok Quan Partnership specialize in?
Civil Procedure 20 cases
Reported between April 2023 and August 2025.
Companies 5 cases
Reported between February 2023 and January 2025.
Damages 4 cases
Reported between February 2023 and February 2026.
Counsel named in these judgments (43)
Lawyers recorded as counsel from Tan Kok Quan Partnership in at least one reported judgment, with the years they appear. Not a current staff list.
All reported cases (38)
-
The Appellate Division allowed AD 54, AD 55 and AD 56 in part and dismissed AD 92.
High Court (Appellate Division) · 3 February 2026 · [2026] SGHC(A) 4 -
The Assistant Registrar allowed the application and granted the unless order, giving the plaintiffs 28 days, by agreement, to comply on pain of their claim for damages being struck out, and ordered…
High Court Registrar · 26 August 2025 · [2025] SGHCR 28 -
The Appellate Division allowed the appeal in part.
High Court (Appellate Division) · 21 July 2025 · [2025] SGHC(A) 10 -
The court upheld the tribunal's finding on the main charge under s 83(2)(b) and ordered that Ms Yeo be suspended for four months, starting on 7 May 2025 at her request, with costs fixed at $5,000 to…
High Court · 18 July 2025 · [2025] SGHC 136 -
The High Court allowed DOM's application in part.
High Court · 28 May 2025 · [2025] SGHC 103 -
The Appellate Division dismissed Campbell's appeal in AD 38 in its entirety and allowed Marchmont's appeal in AD 46 in part.
High Court (Appellate Division) · 22 May 2025 · [2025] SGHC(A) 6 -
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, affirming that Patricia and Evelyn held the legal title to the joint accounts on a resulting trust for Dr Khoo's estate.
Court of Appeal · 30 April 2025 · [2025] SGCA 20 -
The court allowed the application in part.
High Court · 13 January 2025 · [2025] SGHC 6 -
The court dismissed the application for an anti-suit injunction and ordered Finaport to pay Techteryx costs fixed at $9,000, including disbursements and GST.
High Court · 27 December 2024 · [2024] SGHC 329 -
The court allowed TrueCoin's application and granted the anti-suit injunction, permanently restraining Techteryx from continuing to pursue the Hong Kong action against TrueCoin, with liberty to apply.
High Court · 29 November 2024 · [2024] SGHC 296 -
The court allowed the winding-up application and ordered the company to be wound up as unable to pay its debts, with the usual consequential orders, after allowing the amendments naming Ms Tan as…
High Court · 13 November 2024 · [2024] SGHC 291 -
The Appellate Division, in a judgment delivered by Woo Bih Li JAD, dismissed the striking-out application and ordered the defendants to pay Marchmont costs of $8,000, inclusive of disbursements, on a…
High Court (Appellate Division) · 26 September 2024 · [2024] SGHC(A) 30 -
Aedit Abdullah J dismissed KPMG's striking out application, finding that the Statement of Claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action in contract.
High Court · 10 July 2024 · [2024] SGHC 176 -
The court found the drivers of the Toyota, the BMW and the semi-trailer negligent, with the Toyota's owner and the semi-trailer driver's employer vicariously liable.
High Court · 10 June 2024 · [2024] SGHC 150 -
Kwek Mean Luck J allowed Marchmont's claims, ordering possession, double value for holding over from 29 December 2022, damages for loss of rent and reinstatement to be assessed by the Registrar,…
High Court · 2 May 2024 · [2024] SGHC 108 -
The court allowed the application, ordering that the two suits be tried jointly before the same Judge, and granted the ancillary orders sought.
High Court · 25 March 2024 · [2024] SGHC 84 -
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the permanent injunctions and other final relief, with costs to the respondents in the aggregate sum of $30,000 all-in.
Court of Appeal · 22 March 2024 · [2024] SGCA 9 -
The Appellate Division dismissed Luckin's application for permission to appeal against the decision in RA 206.
High Court (Appellate Division) · 5 March 2024 · [2024] SGHC(A) 7 -
The Court of Appeal allowed the application in part.
Court of Appeal · 14 February 2024 · [2024] SGCA 4 -
Choo Han Teck J refused to enforce the letters as contentious business agreements, so the applicant succeeded only in part.
High Court · 31 January 2024 · [2024] SGHC 26 -
Valerie Thean J dismissed both OA 637 and SUM 2196.
High Court · 9 January 2024 · [2024] SGHC 1 -
Goh Yihan J dismissed the claimant's application for interim injunctions.
High Court · 29 December 2023 · [2023] SGHC 359 -
The High Court (Goh Yihan J) dismissed both appeals and affirmed the Assistant Registrar's decision converting the two originating applications into originating claims.
High Court · 22 December 2023 · [2023] SGHC 356 -
The Court of Appeal (Sundaresh Menon CJ, Steven Chong JCA and Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA) held that the appeal was confined to the two questions, answered them in the affirmative by approving the Mode…
Court of Appeal · 30 November 2023 · [2023] SGCA 43 -
The court ordered costs against the town councils: STC to pay the employees and FMSS $51,637.50 plus disbursements of $4,444.27 for CA 196; AHTC to pay them $63,112.50 plus $5,431.88 for CA 197; STC…
Court of Appeal · 29 November 2023 · [2023] SGCA 42 -
The High Court allowed the plaintiffs' claim in part and dismissed the counterclaim.
High Court · 31 October 2023 · [2023] SGHC 314 -
The High Court allowed the plaintiffs' application for final relief against the first and third defendants.
High Court · 23 October 2023 · [2023] SGHC 297 -
The court agreed with the assistant registrar that the four requests were requests for evidence, and dismissed KPMG's appeal.
High Court · 27 September 2023 · [2023] SGHC 270 -
Goh Yihan JC allowed the application in part.
High Court · 23 August 2023 · [2023] SGHC 234 -
The High Court ordered JPW to pay Crescendas $409,357.79 for the first tranche, being 30% of legal costs of $745,000 and 40% of disbursements, and $889,193.92 for the second tranche, being 80% of…
High Court · 3 August 2023 · [2023] SGHC 209 -
The High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the Assistant Registrar's production order.
High Court · 24 July 2023 · [2023] SGHC 198 -
The Court of Appeal dismissed both applications, holding that there was no departure from the basis of the stay.
Court of Appeal · 13 July 2023 · [2023] SGCA 22 -
Goh Yihan JC dismissed the application in OA 607, so the consent judgment stands, and made no order on SUM 1288.
High Court · 12 July 2023 · [2023] SGHC 189 -
The court allowed Civil Appeals Nos 196, 197, 198 and 199 of 2019 in part and dismissed Civil Appeal No 200 of 2019.
Court of Appeal · 7 July 2023 · [2023] SGCA 21 -
The court allowed the claim in part and assessed damages at $173,403.69: $25,000 for pain and suffering ($8,000 for the neck and $17,000 for the back), the agreed $2,600 pre-trial loss of earnings…
High Court · 18 May 2023 · [2023] SGHC 147 -
Goh Yihan JC allowed the plaintiffs' appeal.
High Court · 28 April 2023 · [2023] SGHC 113 -
The court dismissed both Originating Application No 873 of 2022 and Originating Application No 883 of 2022.
High Court · 24 February 2023 · [2023] SGHC 43 -
The Appellate Division allowed CA 87 in part and allowed CA 88 in part.
High Court (Appellate Division) · 9 February 2023 · [2023] SGHC(A) 9
In the court record
The reported judgments Tan Kok Quan Partnership appears in are aggregated on the practice-area court records below, each of which sets out the firms that appear most often in that area of the reported record.
- In Civil Procedure Lawyers in Singapore: The Court Record, Tan Kok Quan Partnership is among the firms that appear most often in the reported judgments.
- In Conflict of Laws Lawyers in Singapore: The Court Record, Tan Kok Quan Partnership is among the firms that appear most often in the reported judgments.
- In Damages Lawyers in Singapore: The Court Record, Tan Kok Quan Partnership is among the firms that appear most often in the reported judgments.
- In Injunctions Lawyers in Singapore: The Court Record, Tan Kok Quan Partnership is among the firms that appear most often in the reported judgments.
- In Landlord and Tenant Lawyers in Singapore: The Court Record, Tan Kok Quan Partnership is among the firms that appear most often in the reported judgments.
These appearances also feed the Largest Law Firms in Singapore, Ranked by Reported Court Cases, the site-wide court-record ranking of Singapore firms by the number of reported judgments in which they appear.