Chow Kin Wah

Chow Kin Wah is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2001 to 2002. The lawyer has handled 3 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 2 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in patent infringement and patents. Their track record shows a 67.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 1 complex case, representing 33% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated expertise across 13 primary practice areas, with significant experience in patent infringement and patents.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Patent Infringement	2 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Patents	2 cases	13% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 13% of their total caseload.
Trademarks	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	1 cases	7% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Trademark Infringement	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Well Known Trade Marks	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Groundless threats of infringement proceedings	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Patent Specification	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Patent Validity	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Groundless threat of infringement	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Commercial Litigation	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Litigation	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.
Intellectual Property Law	1 cases	7% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Chow Kin Wah has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 7% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Chow Kin Wah has been affiliated with 2 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 2 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Alban Tay Mahtani & de Silva	2 cases	67% of cases	Contour Optik v Pearl's Optical: Patent Infringement, Spectacle Frames, Magnetic Clip-ons(Oct 2002) The Polo/Lauren Company L.P. v United States Polo Association: Trademark Dispute over Polo Player Logo(Jan 2002)
Tan Loh & Wong	1 cases	33% of cases	Ng Kok Cheng v Chua Say Tiong: Patent Infringement & Validity of 'Duro' Lock Patent(Jun 2001)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Chow Kin Wah's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 4.5
Complex Cases: 1 (33%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	12.0 parties avg	2.0	33%
Won	25.3 parties avg	5.3	67%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2001	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2002	25.3 parties avg	5.3

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Chow Kin Wah's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	1(33%)	33%
Won	2(67%)	67%

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2001	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2002	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 3 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Contour Optik v Pearl's Optical: Patent Infringement, Spectacle Frames, Magnetic Clip-ons 13 Oct 2002 AZ Optics Centre (Defendant)Won	13 Oct 2002	AZ Optics Centre (Defendant): Claims DismissedThe Plaintiffs’ claims against all four Defendants in both Suits are dismissed.
2	The Polo/Lauren Company L.P. v United States Polo Association: Trademark Dispute over Polo Player Logo 17 Jan 2002 United States Polo Association (Applicant, Respondent)Won	17 Jan 2002	United States Polo Association (Applicant, Respondent): Applications allowedThe applicant's applications to register its marks were allowed.
3	Ng Kok Cheng v Chua Say Tiong: Patent Infringement & Validity of 'Duro' Lock Patent 21 Jun 2001 Chua Say Tiong (Defendant)Lost	21 Jun 2001	Chua Say Tiong (Defendant): Counterclaim DismissedThe counterclaim was dismissed. The plaintiff is awarded the costs of this action and the counterclaim, to be regarded as one set of costs since the issues were intertwined.