N

Nicholas Khoo

This page is a record of reported Singapore judgments that name Nicholas Khoo. It is not a directory listing. Names and firms appear as they were recorded in each judgment at the time. For current practising status and firm, see the Legal Services Regulatory Authority directory.

Nicholas Khoo appears as counsel of record in 4 reported Singapore judgments (2023–2026), most often before the High Court.

These cases span several subject areas, most often Criminal Procedure and Sentencing, and Nicholas Khoo acted for the respondent in 3 and the appellant in 1.

Reported cases
4
Courts
High Court, Court of Appeal, High Court (Family Division)
Period
June 2023 to May 2026

Source: derived from 4 published Singapore judgments, most recent decision .

Nicholas Khoo — Reported Cases & Litigation Record

How Nicholas Khoo appeared

Counsel for the respondent
3 cases
Counsel for the appellant
1 case

Recorded outcomes

Appeal allowed
1
Appeal dismissed
1

Outcome recorded for 2 of the 4 cases.

What the courts decided

  • “I allowed the appeal and set aside the fine of $5,000 imposed by the DJ for the RTA Charge, substituting it with a term of four weeks’ imprisonment.”

    High Court · 26 May 2026 · [2026] SGHC 116 · Counsel for the appellant · Appeal allowed
  • “…we dismiss the appeal and exercise our discretion to enhance the appellant’s individual sentences as follows:(a) 1st Charge: 27 years’ imprisonment (consecutive);(b) 6th Charge: 77 months’ imprisonment (concurrent);(c) 8th Charge: 66 months’ imprisonment (concurrent);(d) 11th Charge: 84 months’ imprisonment (consecutive); and(e) 13th Charge: 66 months’ imprisonment (concurrent).”

    Court of Appeal · 12 May 2026 · [2026] SGCA 25 · Counsel for the respondent · Appeal dismissed

Parties in these cases

Niranjan s/o Muthupalani1 WNE1 Lian Hoe Heng1 Eng Kwan Meng Garrick1

What areas of law does Nicholas Khoo practice?

4
Appearances
2
Roles
1
Firm
No
Senior Counsel

Counsel for the appellant (1)

Counsel for the respondent (3)

Rankings

Most active lawyers by reported court cases →