Leading Tort Lawyers & Firms by Reported Cases — Singapore

104 reported cases · January 2024 to May 2026

Updated

Across 104 reported Tort judgments in Singapore courts (January 2024 to May 2026), Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP is the most active firm by reported case count (11 cases), Phua Cheng Sye Charles is the most active lawyer (3 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

Tort accounts for 104 judgments in the Singapore courts between January 2024 and May 2026, ranking 7th among 49 practice areas in this dataset of 1,374 cases. The High Court (General Division) heard the largest share, followed by the District Court and the Appellate Division of the High Court. The most frequent sub-topics are misrepresentation through fraud and deceit (16 cases), conspiracy (14 cases), and negligence in the duty of care (11 cases).

Across these 104 judgments, 54 judges, 141 firms and 431 lawyers appeared. Steven Chong heard the most matters (9 cases), ahead of Mohamed Faizal (8), with Belinda Ang Saw Ean and Woo Bih Li next (6 each). Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP led the firms with 11 cases, followed by Drew & Napier LLC (9) and Allen & Gledhill LLP (8). Vikram Nair, Phua Cheng Sye Charles and Lin Hui Yin Sharon each recorded 3 appearances.

Data coverage: between January 2024 and May 2026

Which law firms handle the most Tort cases in Singapore?

Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP leads in Tort with 11 cases between January 2024 and May 2026, followed by Drew & Napier LLC (9 cases) and Allen & Gledhill LLP (8 cases). A total of 141 firms appeared in Tort cases during this period.

Who are the leading Tort lawyers in Singapore?

Vikram Nair, Phua Cheng Sye Charles and Lin Hui Yin Sharon are the most active Tort lawyers in this dataset, each with 3 case appearances between January 2024 and May 2026. In total 431 lawyers appeared across these 104 Tort judgments in the Singapore courts.

Which judges handle the most Tort cases in Singapore?

Steven Chong has handled 9 Tort cases between January 2024 and May 2026, the most of any judge here. Mohamed Faizal (8 cases), Belinda Ang Saw Ean (6 cases) and Woo Bih Li (6 cases) are also among the most active, out of 54 judges.

How many Tort cases are heard in Singapore courts?

This dataset records 104 Tort judgments in the Singapore courts between January 2024 and May 2026. The High Court (General Division) heard the largest share, ahead of the District Court and the Appellate Division of the High Court.

What are the main sub-topics in Singapore Tort cases?

The leading Tort sub-topics are misrepresentation through fraud and deceit (16 cases), conspiracy (14 cases), negligence in the duty of care (11 cases) and breach of duty in negligence (10 cases), based on this dataset.

Is Tort a common area of litigation in Singapore?

Tort is the 7th most common of 49 practice areas in this dataset, with 104 judgments, about 7.6% of the 1,374 total cases between January 2024 and May 2026. Top sub-topics include misrepresentation, conspiracy and negligence.

Case Volume by Year

34
24
43
25
27
26
2024–2026

Key Issues & Sub-Topics

Breach of statutory duty — Duties imposed by statute 2 cases

Assault and battery — Digital penetration 1 case

Defamation — Reference to plaintiff — Whether readers in Singapore would understand the Facebook Posts to refer to the plaintiffs 1 case

Key Statutes

cited in 34 cases
cited in 8 cases
cited in 8 cases
Defamation Act
cited in 7 cases
Misrepresentation Act
cited in 7 cases
cited in 5 cases
cited in 4 cases
Restructuring and Dissolution Act
cited in 4 cases
Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act
cited in 4 cases
cited in 3 cases
cited in 3 cases
COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act
cited in 3 cases
cited in 3 cases
cited in 2 cases
cited in 2 cases

Guides & Data

Court Distribution

Cases

Page 5 of 5

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.