JFX & Anor v JFZ
Key facts
| Court | Small Claims Tribunals |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judge | Kevin Ho Hin Tat |
| Charges / claim | Damages |
Source: [2026] SGSCT 26, Small Claims Tribunals, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Parties (3)
Case Significance
JFX and another v JFZ [2026] SGSCT 26 was decided by Tribunal Magistrate Kevin Ho Hin Tat in the Small Claims Tribunals, with grounds of decision dated 30 September 2026. The two claimants, co-founders of Company X, enrolled in the respondent's coaching membership, the 1st claimant paying US$9,997 and later US$29,997 for an upgrade, and the 2nd claimant paying US$18,876. On 23 February 2026 the respondent concluded the group coaching cycle. The issues were whether the respondent repudiated the contract and what damages were due. The Tribunal found repudiation, as 17 of 36 group coaching sessions remained undelivered, and awarded damages for diminution in value: S$20,000 to the 1st claimant and S$16,103.63 to the 2nd claimant.
[2026] SGSCT 26 explained
JFX & Anor v JFZ ([2026] SGSCT 26) is a Singapore judgment decided by the SGSCT on 30 September 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] SGSCT 26 about?
JFX & Anor v JFZ ([2026] SGSCT 26) is a SGSCT decision from 2026. Its published catchwords are “Damages – Measure of damages – Contract for provision of services – Diminution in value”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
What earlier Singapore cases does [2026] SGSCT 26 cite?
Among the in-corpus authorities it refers to are [2026] SGHC 175. The complete list of cases cited, and of later cases that cite this decision, is shown on this page.
Summary
The Small Claims Tribunals heard two claims by co-founders of Company X against JFZ, a business coaching provider that ended its group coaching sessions early. The Tribunal Magistrate found JFZ had repudiated the contract by depriving the claimants of substantially the whole benefit of the Elite membership, and assessed damages based on diminution in value. JFX was awarded S$20,000, the tribunal's maximum, and JGA was awarded S$16,103.63.
What was JFX and another v JFZ [2026] SGSCT 26 about?
Two co-founders of Company X claimed damages from a business coaching provider that ended its group coaching sessions early on 23 February 2026. The Tribunal found repudiation of the contract and assessed damages by diminution in value.
How much damages were awarded in [2026] SGSCT 26?
The 1st claimant was awarded S$20,000, the Small Claims Tribunals' maximum, because her assessed damages of S$34,119.96 exceeded the limit. The 2nd claimant was awarded S$16,103.63, both at an agreed rate of 1 USD to 1.3 SGD.
Cases Cited (13)
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2026] SGSCT 26)