Tan Zhongshan

Tan Zhongshan is a legal practitioner in Singapore. With documented cases from 2013 to 2024. The lawyer has handled 19 cases in Singapore's courts. Associated with 1 law firm. The lawyer demonstrates particular expertise in criminal law and misuse of drugs act. Their track record shows a 53.0% success rate in resolved cases. They have managed 3 complex cases, representing 16% of their total caseload.

Areas of Practice and Expertise

Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated expertise across 73 primary practice areas, with significant experience in criminal procedure and criminal law.

Practice Area	Case Volume	Distribution	Expertise Level	Description
Criminal Procedure	12 cases	9% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 12 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Criminal Law	11 cases	9% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 11 cases which represents 9% of their total caseload.
Statutory Interpretation	6 cases	5% of total caseload	Experienced66% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 6 cases which represents 5% of their total caseload.
Sentencing	5 cases	4% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 5 cases which represents 4% of their total caseload.
Evidence	4 cases	3% of total caseload	Experienced53% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Misuse of Drugs Act	4 cases	3% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 4 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Administrative Law	4 cases	3% of total caseload	General Practice48% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 4 cases which represents 3% of their total caseload.
Penal Code	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced57% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corruption, Drug Trafficking and Other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act	3 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized77% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 3 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Admissibility of evidence	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Banking Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Corporate Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Commercial Disputes	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Evidence Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Legal Profession Act	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Highly Specialized83% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Civil Procedure	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice28% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Companies Act	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Contract Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice15% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Company Law	2 cases	2% of total caseload	General Practice25% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Appeal	2 cases	2% of total caseload	Experienced65% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 2 cases which represents 2% of their total caseload.
Wills and Probate	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Fiduciary Duties	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Mental Health Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Confiscation and forfeiture	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Criminal Revision	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Natural justice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contracts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Constitutional Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Adverse inferences	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Civil Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Prevention of Corruption Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Contempt of Court	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Burden of proof	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Endangered Species Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Road Traffic Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Culpable Homicide	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Costs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sentencing Framework	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Employment of Foreign Manpower Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Children and Young Persons Act	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Unsound mind	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Murder	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sexual Offences	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Expert evidence	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sentencing Appeals	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Importation of controlled drugs	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Psychiatry	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Chancery and Equity	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Penal statutes	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Conspiracy to Defraud	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Banking and Finance	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice10% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
False statements of fact	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized85% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Falsification of Documents	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Duty to Account	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Asset Recovery	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice20% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Gender Dysphoria	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Property	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Sentencing Principles	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Reinstatement	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Misappropriation of Funds	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Breach of Solicitors' Accounts Rules	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Newton hearings	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized100% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Criminal Breach of Trust	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized95% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Appellate Practice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Obstructing, preventing, perverting or defeating course of justice	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice40% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Environmental Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Harassment	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized75% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
International Trade	1 cases	1% of total caseload	General Practice30% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated general practice experiencein this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Legal Ethics and Professional Responsibility	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized90% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Litigation	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced60% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Privacy Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Highly Specialized80% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated deep specialization and significant involvement in complex mattersin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Property Law	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced50% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.
Torts	1 cases	1% of total caseload	Experienced70% relevance score	Tan Zhongshan has demonstrated substantial experience and regular engagementin this area, handling 1 cases which represents 1% of their total caseload.

Law Firm Affiliations

Tan Zhongshan has been affiliated with 1 law firm. The most active affiliation involves 19 cases.

Law Firm	Cases Handled	Workload Share	Recent Cases
Attorney-General’s Chambers	19 cases	100% of cases	Sentek Marine v MPA Singapore: Judicial Review of Bunkering License Non-Renewal(Aug 2024) The Inquiry Pte Ltd v Attorney-General: POFMA Appeal - Statutory Interpretation & Online Falsehoods(Sep 2023) Mohd Sadique v Law Society & AG: Reinstatement to Roll of Advocates and Solicitors(Sep 2023)

Case Complexity Analysis

Analysis of Tan Zhongshan's case complexity based on the number of parties involved and case characteristics.

Complexity Overview

Average Parties per Case: 2.8
Complex Cases: 3 (16%); Cases with more than 3 parties

Complexity by Case Type

Type	Cases	Avg Parties	Distribution
Lost	53.6 parties avg	3.6	26%
Neutral	22.5 parties avg	2.5	11%
Partial	14.0 parties avg	4.0	5%
Unknown	15.0 parties avg	5.0	5%
Won	102.1 parties avg	2.1	53%

Complexity Trends Over Time

Year	Cases	Average Parties
2013	15.0 parties avg	5.0
2014	14.0 parties avg	4.0
2016	12.0 parties avg	2.0
2017	53.4 parties avg	3.4
2018	42.3 parties avg	2.3
2019	42.3 parties avg	2.3
2023	22.5 parties avg	2.5
2024	12.0 parties avg	2.0

Case Outcome Analytics

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

Outcome Distribution

Outcome Type	Cases	Percentage
Lost	5(26%)	26%
Neutral	2(11%)	11%
Partial	1(5%)	5%
Unknown	1(5%)	5%
Won	10(53%)	53%

Monetary Outcomes

Currency	Total Amount	Average	Cases
SGD	0.00	0.002 cases	2

Yearly Outcome Trends

Year	Total Cases	Outcome Distribution
2013	1 1	Unknown: 1 cases (100.0%)
2014	1 1	Partial: 1 cases (100.0%)
2016	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)
2017	5 32	Lost: 3 cases (60.0%) Won: 2 cases (40.0%)
2018	4 4	Won: 4 cases (100.0%)
2019	4 211	Lost: 2 cases (50.0%) Neutral: 1 cases (25.0%) Won: 1 cases (25.0%)
2023	2 11	Neutral: 1 cases (50.0%) Won: 1 cases (50.0%)
2024	1 1	Won: 1 cases (100.0%)

Case History

Displaying all 19 cases

No.	Case	Decision Date	Party & Outcome
1	Sentek Marine v MPA Singapore: Judicial Review of Bunkering License Non-Renewal 26 Aug 2024 Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (Respondent)Won	26 Aug 2024	Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (Respondent): Decision UpheldThe MPA's decision not to renew Sentek's bunkering licenses was upheld by the court.
2	The Inquiry Pte Ltd v Attorney-General: POFMA Appeal - Statutory Interpretation & Online Falsehoods 05 Sep 2023 Attorney-General (Respondent)Won	05 Sep 2023	Attorney-General (Respondent): Judgment for RespondentThe court found in favor of the Attorney-General, upholding the Correction Directions.
3	Mohd Sadique v Law Society & AG: Reinstatement to Roll of Advocates and Solicitors 04 Sep 2023 The Attorney-General (Respondent)Neutral	04 Sep 2023	The Attorney-General (Respondent): No Order as to CostsThe Attorney-General did not seek costs for the Reinstatement Application.
4	Anita Damu v Public Prosecutor: Mental Illness, Expert Evidence, and Admissibility 29 Sep 2019 Public Prosecutor (Respondent, Appellant)Neutral	29 Sep 2019	Public Prosecutor (Respondent, Appellant): Further directions to be givenThe court will hear the parties before giving further directions.
5	PP v Mageswaran: Culpable Homicide Sentencing & Mens Rea 10 Apr 2019 Public Prosecutor (Appellant, Respondent)Lost	10 Apr 2019	Public Prosecutor (Appellant, Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe Prosecution's appeal against the sentence was dismissed.
6	Kong Hoo v Public Prosecutor: Interpreting 'In Transit' under the Endangered Species Act 07 Apr 2019 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	07 Apr 2019	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedAppeal dismissed; convictions of the applicants were quashed.
7	Li Shengwu v Attorney-General: Jurisdiction over Foreign Contemnor, Scandalising Contempt 31 Mar 2019 The Attorney-General (Respondent, Applicant)Won	31 Mar 2019	The Attorney-General (Respondent, Applicant): Appeal UpheldThe Attorney-General's position that the High Court had jurisdiction over the appellant was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.
8	Mohd Aziz v Public Prosecutor: Appeal Against Conviction for Drug Trafficking 14 Nov 2018 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Won	14 Nov 2018	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Appeal DismissedThe appeal against the conviction was dismissed.
9	Public Prosecutor v Gobi a/l Avedian: Illegal Importation of Diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act 24 Oct 2018 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	24 Oct 2018	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal allowedThe Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and found the respondent guilty on the original charge.
10	PP v Tan Kay Yong: Trafficking of Diamorphine under Misuse of Drugs Act 20 Mar 2018 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	20 Mar 2018	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): Judgment for the ProsecutionThe Public Prosecutor won the case against both accused.
11	Public Prosecutor v Siva Raman: Drug Importation & Misuse of Drugs Act 11 Jan 2018 Public Prosecutor (Prosecution)Won	11 Jan 2018	Public Prosecutor (Prosecution): ConvictionThe Prosecution successfully convicted the accused on both charges.
12	Rajendar Prasad Rai v Public Prosecutor: Stay of Orders Pending Restraint Order Application Under CDSA 30 Jul 2017 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	30 Jul 2017	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Application dismissedThe Prosecution's application to temporarily stay the orders which I had made should be dismissed, and that the orders were to be carried out with immediate effect.
13	PP v Koh Thiam Huat: Dangerous Driving & Sentencing Principles 24 May 2017 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	24 May 2017	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe Public Prosecutor's appeal was allowed, resulting in a custodial sentence for the respondent. The currency is assumed to be SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
14	Rajendar Prasad Rai v Public Prosecutor: Revision of Order for Seizure of Property under Criminal Procedure Code 12 Mar 2017 Public Prosecutor (Respondent)Lost	12 Mar 2017	Public Prosecutor (Respondent): Order Set AsideThe Magistrate's Order to extend the seizure of funds was set aside.
15	Attorney-General v Ting Choon Meng: Harassment & False Statements under Protection from Harassment Act 15 Jan 2017 Attorney-General (Appellant, Respondent)Lost	15 Jan 2017	Attorney-General (Appellant, Respondent): Appeal dismissed with costs.The Attorney-General's appeal was dismissed, and they were ordered to pay costs. Assumed SGD, as the judgment originates from Singapore.
16	Public Prosecutor v BAB: Statutory Interpretation of Penal Code s 376A(1)(b) & Gender of Offender 05 Jan 2017 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	05 Jan 2017	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe Prosecution's appeal was allowed, and the Judge's decision to set aside the convictions under s 376A(1)(b) was reversed.
17	Public Prosecutor v Osi Maria Elenora Protacio: Appeal Against Inadequate Sentence for Criminal Breach of Trust 20 Apr 2016 Public Prosecutor (Appellant)Won	20 Apr 2016	Public Prosecutor (Appellant): Appeal AllowedThe Prosecution's appeal against the sentence was allowed, and the Respondent's sentence was enhanced.
18	PP v Li Weiming: Criminal Case Disclosure, Intent to Defraud, Falsification of Accounts 22 Jan 2014 Public Prosecutor (Applicant)Partial	22 Jan 2014	Public Prosecutor (Applicant): Orders for particulars set asideThe court set aside the Judge’s orders that the PP provide the respondents with (a) the identity of the persons whom the respondents allegedly conspired to defraud and (b) the reasons why the subcontract between ZTE and Questzone was allegedly fictitious.
19	Re Caplan: Ad Hoc Admission of Queen's Counsel Denied in City Harvest Church Criminal Breach of Trust Case 07 Apr 2013 Attorney-General (Respondent)	07 Apr 2013	Attorney-General (Respondent): -