Singapore Court Judgments — Week of 1–7 June 2026
In the week of 1–7 June 2026 (1 June 2026–7 June 2026), 9 judgments were reported across the Singapore courts. This weekly digest lists the notable decisions and their verbatim dispositions, free to read.
Last updated
Week of 1–7 June 2026
9 reported judgmentsThe week of 1–7 June 2026 produced nine reported judgments, with three from the High Court (Family Division) and single judgments from the District Court, the High Court (General Division), the High Court (Appellate Division), the Singapore International Commercial Court, the Magistrate Court, and the Small Claims Tribunal. The High Court (Family Division) dismissed appeals in a family law matter and in a matter concerning courts and jurisdiction, civil procedure, and mental disorders and treatment, and heard a further family law matter. The High Court (Appellate Division) dismissed a contract appeal, the Singapore International Commercial Court dismissed an application in an arbitration matter, and the High Court (General Division) allowed an appeal in a criminal law matter. Further matters before the District Court concerned setting aside and before the Magistrate Court concerned contempt of court.
Notable judgments this week
| Citation | Court | Judgment | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| [2026] SGHC(A) 17 | SGHC(A) | DEEPAK MISHRA & Anor v RASHMI BOTHRA Contract | Appeal dismissed |
| [2026] SGHC(I) 5 | SGHC(I) | DTH & Anor v DTF & Ors Arbitration | Application dismissed |
| [2026] SGHC 121 | SGHC | PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v ANNAMALAI KOKILA PARVATHI AND OTHER APPEALS Criminal Law | Appeal allowed |
| [2026] SGHCF 17 | SGHCF | XWV v XWW Family Law | Appeal dismissed |
| [2026] SGHCF 18 | SGHCF | YET v YEU Courts and Jurisdiction · Civil Procedure · Mental Disorders and Treatment | Appeal dismissed |
| [2026] SGHCF 16 | SGHCF | XZC v XZD Family Law | — |
| [2026] SGDC 127 | SGDC | SHARIFFAH ZAITON BINTE SYED AGIL ALSAGOFF v RITA ZAHARA BINTE MOHAMED NAZEER Setting aside | — |
| [2026] SGMC 67 | SGMC | CAIRNHILL LAW LLC v ROYAL SANITARY & PLUMBING PTE. LTD. Contempt of Court | — |
Dispositions, in the court's words
“The appeal was therefore dismissed for the reasons stated above.”
“we dismiss the application in its entirety.”
“I allowed the appeal and sentenced each of the Respondents to a fine of $3,000 (in default one week’s imprisonment).”
“I dismissed the appeal accordingly.”
“The appeal is therefore dismissed.”
Dispositions are quoted verbatim from the judgment text. They summarise the order made and are not legal advice.
Counsel and law firms this week
12 law firms and 12 counsel appeared in this week's reported judgments, counted by number of judgments and excluding the Attorney-General's Chambers.
Derived from 9 reported judgments with decision_date in 2026-06-01–2026-06-07 in the Singapore case-law corpus. Dispositions are verbatim from judgment_text (via case_outcome); counsel/firm lists are from case_entities, prosecutor-filtered (Attorney-General's Chambers excluded). Digest compiled . Notable judgments are selected by court seniority, citation frequency and disposition parseability.