JFY v JFZ

[2026] SGSCT 7 Small Claims Tribunals 15 April 2026 SCT/17165/2025 12 min read
1 cases cited (0 SG, 1 foreign)

Key facts

Court Small Claims Tribunals
Decided
Judge Jared Kang Chern Wey
Charges / claim Courts and Jurisdiction

Source: [2026] SGSCT 7, Small Claims Tribunals, decided — eLitigation. Updated .

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Parties (2)

Case Significance

In JFY v JFZ [2026] SGSCT 7, Tribunal Magistrate Jared Kang Chern Wey dismissed both a claim and a counterclaim arising from a contract for commercial interior photography services after finding that the Small Claims Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to hear either dispute. The claimant had sought a money order of $5,715 for a deposit paid under the contract, while the respondent counterclaimed for an unpaid balance he said was owed; following a hearing on 27 January 2026, the tribunal held on 15 April 2026 that both the claim (Claim No 17165 of 2025) and the counterclaim (Counterclaim No 1271 of 2025) were brought outside the two-year time limit in section 5(3)(b) of the Small Claims Tribunals Act 1984, and discontinued both.

Summary

The claimant engaged the respondent for a commercial interior photography shoot under a contract recorded in a signed quotation, and after the parties reached an impasse following two of three planned shoot days, the claimant sought a money order of $5,715 for the deposit paid, while the respondent counterclaimed for the unpaid balance. The parties agreed the contract was formed around early November 2022, and the Tribunal Magistrate found that, applying the two-year time limit in section 5(3)(b) of the Small Claims Tribunals Act 1984, both the claim and the counterclaim were brought out of time. Both the claim and the counterclaim were discontinued for want of jurisdiction.

What did the Small Claims Tribunal decide in JFY v JFZ [2026] SGSCT 7?

The Small Claims Tribunal dismissed a $5,715 deposit claim over a photography contract and a related counterclaim for unpaid fees, ruling on 15 April 2026 that both were filed outside the two-year time limit under section 5(3)(b) of the Small Claims Tribunals Act 1984.

Statutes Cited

Small Claims Tribunals Act Cases on this Act →
s 5(3)(b)

Cases Cited (1)

UK (1)
[2006] EWHC 3156

Referenced in

Statutes interpreted in this judgment

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.

Read on eLitigation

Source: eLitigation ([2026] SGSCT 7)