Stamford Land Management Pte Ltd v Nur Aniza binte Mohd Shah
Outcome
Claim allowed“The claim is allowed in full.”
Source: [2026] SGDC 232, District Court, decided 17 July 2026. Read directly from the judgment.
Key facts
| Court | District Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Tay Jingxi |
| Charges / claim | Contract, Employment Law |
| Outcome | Claim allowed |
| Counsel | Audent Chambers LLC, Sanders Law LLC, Wong Thai Yong LLC, Lim Jun Heng, Sarbrinder Singh s/o Naranjan Singh, Tay Yu E, Victor Leong, Wong Thai Yong |
Source: [2026] SGDC 232, District Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (8)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
Stamford Land Management Pte Ltd v Nur Aniza binte Mohd Shah [2026] SGDC 232 was decided by District Judge Tay Jingxi in the District Court on 17 July 2026. The claimant sued its former accountant for failing, between December 2023 and March 2024, to place $8,525,666.66 in a fixed deposit and for submitting documents that falsely suggested it had been placed. The issues were the scope of her contractual duties, breach of contract and the measure of damages. The court found she breached her employment contract and had falsified an HSBC statement to show a balance of $8,950. It awarded damages of $119,490.14 after crediting $2,732.88 of interest from mitigation.
[2026] SGDC 232 explained
Stamford Land Management Pte Ltd v Nur Aniza binte Mohd Shah ([2026] SGDC 232) is a Singapore judgment decided by the District Court on 17 July 2026. It is categorised under Contract and Employment Law. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2026] SGDC 232 about?
Stamford Land Management Pte Ltd v Nur Aniza binte Mohd Shah ([2026] SGDC 232) is a District Court decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Contract – Breach”, “Contract – Remedies – Damages”, “Contract – Contractual terms – Express terms”, and “Employment Law – Contract of service – Breach”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGDC 232 consider?
The judgment refers to Evidence Act (Cap 97). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
Summary
The District Court heard a claim by Stamford Land Management Pte Ltd against its former accountant, Nur Aniza binte Mohd Shah, for failing to place $8,525,666.66 in a fixed deposit and for submitting documents giving the false impression that she had. The court found she breached her employment contract, including by falsifying a bank statement to show a balance of $8,950. It allowed the claim in full and ordered her to pay damages of $119,490.14.
What was Stamford Land Management v Nur Aniza about ([2026] SGDC 232)?
An employer sued its former accountant for failing to place $8,525,666.66 in a fixed deposit and for submitting documents falsely suggesting it had done so. The District Court found breach of contract and allowed the claim.
How much damages were awarded in [2026] SGDC 232?
The District Court ordered the defendant to pay damages of $119,490.14, being expectation loss of $122,223.02 less $2,732.88 of interest earned on the claimant's later fixed deposit.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (12)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGDC 232)