Leading Succession and Wills Lawyers & Firms by Reported Cases — Singapore

8 reported cases · February 2024 to May 2026

Updated

Across 8 reported Succession and Wills judgments in Singapore courts (February 2024 to May 2026), Lisa Sam & Company is the most active firm by reported case count (2 cases), Narayanan Sreenivasan is the most active lawyer (1 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

The dataset records 8 Succession and Wills judgments in Singapore between February 2024 and May 2026, ranking the practice area 35th of 49 areas tracked and representing a small share of the 1,374 cases in the dataset. The matters appeared mainly in the Singapore High Court (SGHC, 7), with the Family Division (SGHCF, 4) and the Appellate Division (SGHC(A), 1) also represented. The most frequent sub-topic was testamentary capacity arising from mental disability (2 cases).

Data coverage: between February 2024 and May 2026

Which law firms handle the most Succession and Wills cases in Singapore?

Lisa Sam & Company leads in Succession and Wills with 2 cases between February 2024 and May 2026, followed by Sreenivasan Chambers LLC, Netto & Magin LLC, and Rajwin & Yong LLP with 1 case each. In total, 17 firms appeared in these cases during this period.

Who are the leading Succession and Wills lawyers in Singapore?

Narayanan Sreenivasan, Thio Shen Yi, and Chung Ting Fai each recorded 1 Succession and Wills appearance between February 2024 and May 2026. With no lawyer appearing more than once, representation was spread across the 35 lawyers documented in the dataset.

Which judges handle the most Succession and Wills cases in Singapore?

Choo Han Teck has handled 3 Succession and Wills cases between February 2024 and May 2026, the most of any Singapore judge in the dataset. See Kee Oon, Debbie Ong Siew Ling, and Ang Cheng Hock each recorded 1, drawn from 8 judges total.

How many Succession and Wills cases are heard in Singapore courts?

The dataset records 8 Succession and Wills cases in Singapore between February 2024 and May 2026. The Singapore High Court (SGHC) accounted for the most with 7 entries in the court distribution, followed by the Family Division of the High Court (SGHCF) with 4.

What are the main sub-topics in Singapore Succession and Wills cases?

The leading sub-topic across the 8 Succession and Wills cases is testamentary capacity arising from mental disability (2 cases). Other catchwords address testamentary capacity generally, the construction of wills, formalities of a will, revocation by a later instrument, and the validity of wills.

Case Volume by Year

5
24
2
25
1
26
2024–2026

Key Issues & Sub-Topics

Construction — Application of armchair principle to construction of meaning of testament constituting express testamentary trust — Whether testament on proper construction conferred power on trustee to effect conversion of preference share in company held on trust into ordinary share notwithstanding trustee holds ordinary shares in same company as absolute owner 1 case

Revocation — later instrument 1 case

Testamentary capacity — Mental disability Succession and Wills — Revocation — Later instrument 1 case

Construction — Meaning of “custody, care and control” 1 case

Conditions — Grandsons who remain within the custody, care and control of the testator’s sons 1 case

Construction — Meaning of “surviving grandsons born … within twenty-one (21) years of my death” 1 case

Key Statutes

cited in 2 cases
cited in 2 cases
cited in 1 case
Musalman Waqf Validating Act
cited in 1 case
Trustees Act (Cap 337)
cited in 1 case
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.