Leading Mental Disorders and Treatment Lawyers & Firms by Reported Cases — Singapore

4 reported cases · January 2024 to June 2026

Updated

What did Singapore courts decide in Mental Disorders and Treatment?

Singapore courts issued 4 reported Mental Disorders and Treatment judgments between 2024–2026, most in SGHCF (2), of the 2 with a parseable operative disposition, the most common was Appeal dismissed (1). This is a descriptive summary of what the courts recorded in reported decisions, not legal advice.

Reported cases 4 (2024–2026)
By year 2026 (1) · 2025 (1) · 2024 (2)
By court SGHCF (2) · SGCA (1) · SGHC (1)
Outcomes (2 parseable) Appeal dismissed (1) · Application dismissed (1)

Compiled from 4 reported Mental Disorders and Treatment 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 4 reported Mental Disorders and Treatment judgments in Singapore courts (January 2024 to June 2026), Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP is the most active firm by reported case count (2 cases), Teo Su Ning Gillian is the most active lawyer (2 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

Mental Disorders and Treatment appears in 4 reported Singapore judgments (2024–2026). The most common sub-topics are Mental Capacity — Whether donee’s prior conduct is relevant to determination of P’s best interest (1), Management of patients’ property and affairs (1) and Management of patients' property and affairs (1). The most active judge by reported case count is Choo Han Teck (1 case) and the most active firm is Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP (2 cases).

Which law firms handle the most Mental Disorders and Treatment cases in Singapore?

Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP leads in Mental Disorders and Treatment with 2 cases between January 2024 and June 2026, followed by Tan Kok Quan Partnership (2 cases) and K&L Gates Straits Law LLC (1 cases). 7 firms appeared in Mental Disorders and Treatment cases during this period.

Who are the leading Mental Disorders and Treatment lawyers in Singapore?

Teo Su Ning Gillian is the most active Mental Disorders and Treatment lawyer in Singapore with 2 case appearances between January 2024 and June 2026, followed by Zhu Ming-Ren Wilson (2) and Joan Peiyun Lim-Casanova (1).

Which judges handle the most Mental Disorders and Treatment cases in Singapore?

Choo Han Teck has handled 1 Mental Disorders and Treatment cases between January 2024 and June 2026, the most of any Singapore judge. Sundaresh Menon (1 cases) and Belinda Ang Saw Ean (1 cases) are also among the most active.

How many Mental Disorders and Treatment cases are reported in Singapore courts?

4 reported Singapore judgments (2024–2026) involve Mental Disorders and Treatment, most often decided by Choo Han Teck.

What are the main sub-topics in Singapore Mental Disorders and Treatment cases?

The main sub-topics are Mental Capacity — Whether donee’s prior conduct is relevant to determination of P’s best interest (1), Management of patients’ property and affairs (1) and Management of patients' property and affairs (1).

Case Volume by Year

2
24
1
25
1
26
2024–2026

Key Issues & Sub-Topics

Mental Capacity — Whether donee’s prior conduct is relevant to determination of P’s best interest 1 case

Management of patients’ property and affairs 1 case

Management of patients' property and affairs 1 case

Key Statutes

cited in 3 cases
cited in 2 cases
cited in 1 case
Trustees Act (Cap 337)
cited in 1 case
Restructuring and Dissolution Act
cited in 1 case
Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act
cited in 1 case
cited in 1 case
Family Justice Act
cited in 1 case

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.