Chen Eng Kiat v Muhammad Helmy Bin Mohd Hasbollah
Key facts
| Court | Magistrate Court |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Evans Ng |
| Charges / claim | Damages |
| Counsel | Ravus Law Chambers LLC, Darren Jeevan Jose Charles, Jason Yan Zixiang, Sarah Nadia Binte Sazali |
Source: [2026] SGMC 37, Magistrate Court, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (4)
[2026] SGMC 37 explained
Chen Eng Kiat v Muhammad Helmy Bin Mohd Hasbollah ([2026] SGMC 37) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Magistrate Court on 17 March 2026. It is categorised under Damages. 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] SGMC 37 about?
Chen Eng Kiat v Muhammad Helmy Bin Mohd Hasbollah ([2026] SGMC 37) is a Magistrate Court decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Damages — Assessment”, “Damages — Special damages”, and “Damages — Practice and procedure”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Legal concepts & references
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGMC 37)