Prithipal Singh

Prithipal Singh is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2006 to 2016. The lawyer has handled 8 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 4 law firms. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in trademarks and trademark infringement. Their track record shows a 63.0% success rate in resolved cases.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Prithipal Singh has demonstrated expertise across 18 primary practice areas, with significant experience in trademarks and trademark infringement.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Trademarks	6 cases	19% of total caseload	Highly Specialized92% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 19% of their total caseload.
Trademark Infringement	3 cases	9% of total caseload	Highly Specialized87% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	3 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Commercial Law	3 cases	9% of total caseload	General Practice17% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 3 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Patents	2 cases	6% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	6% of total caseload	General Practice23% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 6% of their total caseload.
Dynamic Currency Conversion	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Passing Off	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Breach of Contract	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Advertising and Marketing	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Well Known Trade Marks	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Groundless threats of infringement proceedings	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Trade names	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Patent Infringement	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Pharmaceutical Patents	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Patent Validity	1 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	1 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Prithipal Singh has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Prithipal Singh has been affiliated with 4 law firms. The most active affiliation involves 4 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Mirandah Law LLP	4 cases	50% of cases	Caesarstone Sdot-Yam Ltd v Ceramiche Caesar SpA: Trade Mark Dispute over CAESARSTONE Mark(Mar 2016) Polo/Lauren Co LP v United States Polo Association: Trade Mark Dispute over Polo Player Device(Mar 2016) Staywell v Starwood: Trademark Dispute over 'Park Regis' and 'St. Regis' Brands(Oct 2012)
K.L. Tan & Associates	2 cases	25% of cases	Campomar SL v Nike International Ltd: Trade Mark Registration Dispute(Feb 2011) Campomar SL v Nike International Ltd: Trade Mark Opposition Based on Earlier Trade Mark(May 2010)
Prithipal & Associates	1 cases	13% of cases	Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v DBS Bank Ltd: Patent Infringement & Dynamic Currency Conversion(Jul 2012)
K L Tan and Associates	1 cases	13% of cases	Nike International Ltd v Campomar SL: Trade Mark Revocation for Non-Use(Jan 2006)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Prithipal Singh's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.1
Complex Cases: 0 (0%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	32.0 parties avg	2.0	38%
Won	52.2 parties avg	2.2	63%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2006	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2010	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2011	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2012	32.3 parties avg	2.3
2016	22.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

Analysis of Prithipal Singh's case outcomes, including distribution by type, yearly trends, and monetary outcomes where applicable.

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	3(38%)	38%
Won	5(63%)	63%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.005 cases	5

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2006	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2010	1 1	Lost: 1 cases (100.0%)
2011	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2012	3 12	Lost: 1 cases (33.3%) Won: 2 cases (66.7%)
2016	2 2	Won: 2 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 8 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Caesarstone Sdot-Yam Ltd v Ceramiche Caesar SpA: Trade Mark Dispute over CAESARSTONE Mark 28 Mar 2016 CAESARSTONE SDOT-YAM LTD (Appellant)Won	28 Mar 2016	CAESARSTONE SDOT-YAM LTD (Appellant): Appeal AllowedAppeal allowed; CAESARSTONE Mark is allowed to proceed to registration in Class 19.
2	Polo/Lauren Co LP v United States Polo Association: Trade Mark Dispute over Polo Player Device 07 Mar 2016 United States Polo Association (Defendant, Respondent)Won	07 Mar 2016	United States Polo Association (Defendant, Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed with costs to the defendant. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
3	Staywell v Starwood: Trademark Dispute over 'Park Regis' and 'St. Regis' Brands 08 Oct 2012 STAYWELL HOSPITALITY GROUP PTY LTD (Appellant)Won	08 Oct 2012	STAYWELL HOSPITALITY GROUP PTY LTD (Appellant): Appeal allowedStaywell's appeal was allowed. The judgment does not specify a currency, so SGD is assumed as the jurisdiction is Singapore.
4	Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd v DBS Bank Ltd: Patent Infringement & Dynamic Currency Conversion 19 Jul 2012 Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd (Plaintiff)Won	19 Jul 2012	Main-Line Corporate Holdings Ltd (Plaintiff): Judgment for PlaintiffJudgment for the Plaintiff; an inquiry by the registrar on damages or account of profits will be conducted (assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore).
5	AstraZeneca AB v Ranbaxy: Striking Out Defence and Counterclaim in Patent Infringement Suit 12 Jan 2012 Ranbaxy (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd (Defendant)Lost	12 Jan 2012	Ranbaxy (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd (Defendant): Defence and Counterclaim struck outDisputed pleadings in the Defence and Counterclaim struck out. No monetary amount awarded. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
6	Campomar SL v Nike International Ltd: Trade Mark Registration Dispute 27 Feb 2011 Campomar SL (Appellant)Won	27 Feb 2011	Campomar SL (Appellant): Appeal allowedCampomar's appeal was allowed with costs.
7	Campomar SL v Nike International Ltd: Trade Mark Opposition Based on Earlier Trade Mark 04 May 2010 Campomar SL (Appellant)Lost	04 May 2010	Campomar SL (Appellant): Appeal dismissedAppeal dismissed; costs to be taxed if not agreed. Assumed SGD as the judgment originates from Singapore.
8	Nike International Ltd v Campomar SL: Trade Mark Revocation for Non-Use 15 Jan 2006 Campomar SL (Respondent)Lost	15 Jan 2006	Campomar SL (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal was dismissed, and the trade mark registration was revoked.