NANYANG LAW LLC v GHUI MENG YANG
Outcome
Appeal dismissed“I dismiss the appeal and order that the Decision is to stand, and payment of $2,887.14, being the sum of $2,857.14 and disbursements incurred by Mr Ghui of $30, is to be made within one week from the date of this judgment.”
Source: [2026] SGHC 171, High Court (General Division), decided 24 August 2026. Read directly from the judgment.
Featured in the weekly digest — week of 24–30 August 2026 →
Key facts
| Court | High Court (General Division) |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Sushil Nair |
| Charges / claim | Employment law |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Sentence / award | $2,887.14 |
| Counsel | Nanyang Law LLC, Ng Yi Neng |
Source: [2026] SGHC 171, High Court (General Division), decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Counsel (2)
Parties (2)
Case Significance
Nanyang Law LLC v Ghui Meng Yang [2026] SGHC 171 was decided by Sushil Nair JCA in the General Division of the High Court on 24 August 2026, after a hearing on 13 May 2026. Mr Ghui was engaged as a Supporting Officer under a letter of appointment dated 30 March 2023 with a three-month probation period running until 9 July 2023. On 7 July 2023 Nanyang Law LLC told him his employment would end on 9 July 2023. The Tribunal Magistrate ordered it to pay $2,857.14 with $30 in disbursements. The issue was whether a stipulated probation period is a contract of service for a specified period of time under s 9(1) of the Employment Act 1968. The court dismissed the appeal.
[2026] SGHC 171 explained
NANYANG LAW LLC v GHUI MENG YANG ([2026] SGHC 171) is a Singapore judgment decided by the High Court (General Division) on 24 August 2026. It is categorised under 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] SGHC 171 about?
NANYANG LAW LLC v GHUI MENG YANG ([2026] SGHC 171) is a High Court (General Division) decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Employment law — Termination — Termination of contracts of service for a specified period of time — Whether stipulated probation period is contract of service for a specified period of time under s 9(1) Employment Act 1968”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2026] SGHC 171 consider?
The judgment refers to Employment Act (Cap 91) and Employment Claims Act. The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
Summary
The General Division of the High Court heard an appeal by Nanyang Law LLC against a Tribunal Magistrate's decision that Mr Ghui Meng Yang, whom it ended the employment of at the close of a three-month probation period, was entitled to one month's salary in lieu of notice. The question was whether a contract stipulating a probation period is a contract of service for a specified period of time under s 9(1) of the Employment Act 1968. The court held it is not automatically so, dismissed the appeal and ordered payment of $2,887.14.
Is a probation period a contract for a specified period under s 9(1) of the Employment Act 1968 ([2026] SGHC 171)?
In [2026] SGHC 171, the court held that a contract stipulating a probation period is not automatically a contract of service for a specified period of time under s 9(1); the contractual terms and factual context must be considered.
What did the court order in Nanyang Law LLC v Ghui Meng Yang [2026] SGHC 171?
The court dismissed the appeal and ordered payment of $2,887.14, being $2,857.14 in pro-rated salary in lieu of notice and $30 in disbursements, within one week, with costs of the appeal awarded to Mr Ghui.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (5)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGHC 171)