SheriaNet for Android — search and read Kenyan case law from your phone, offline.
Join the beta →

Goldstein Group Services Limited v Choi & 5 others (Civil Application E656 of 2025) [2026] KECA 361 (KLR) (27 February 2026) (Ruling)

[2026] KECA 361 (KLR) Court of Appeal
Read PDF
Court
Court of Appeal
Case number
361
Citation
[2026] KECA 361 (KLR)
Decided
27 February 2026
AI Summary Beta Machine-generated — may contain errors. Not legal advice.
TypeAppealPostureApplication for enlargement of time to file and serve the Notice of AppealCoramHI ONG'UDI
Holding

The application for enlargement of time to file and serve the Notice of Appeal is granted.

Facts

The applicant, Goldstein Group Services Limited, sought to file a notice of appeal and a record of appeal, which was delayed due to errors at the office. The impugned judgment was delivered on 23rd October, 2025.

Issues

  1. Whether the application for enlargement of time to file and serve the Notice of Appeal meets the principles for extension of time in a matter of this nature.
  2. Whether the respondents have filed any responses or submissions.

Reasoning

Counsel Mwangi explained the cause of the delay arising from errors at the office, for which he is remorseful. The applicant's submissions were supported by MMAS, and the court found that the application meets the principles for extension of time.

Outcome

The application for enlargement of time to file and serve the Notice of Appeal is granted.

Orders

  • The applicant is granted enlargement of time to file a notice of appeal and a record of appeal.

Authorities cited

Cases cited (4)
  • Fakir Mohammed v. Joseph Mugambi & 2 Others [2005] eKLR
  • Edith Gichungu Koine v. Stephen Njagi Thoithi [2014] eKLR
  • Kamotho v. Kamtho [2025] KECA, 2310 [KLR]
  • Athman Nusura Juma v. Afwa Mohammed Ramadhan [2016] eKLR
Experimental AI summary generated by a language model, not a lawyer. It may contain errors or omissions and must not be relied on for legal decisions — the full judgment below is the authoritative source.
Full judgment 0.2 MB · PDF

Loading judgment…

Cite this case


        
        
      

Share this case