MAS Construction Limited v Sheikh & 6 others (Civil Application E524 of 2025) [2026] KECA 113 (KLR)
The bottom line
#Kenya's Court of Appeal gave MAS Construction six extra months to seek Supreme Court review, accepting its explanation for missing the 30-day deadline.
What this practically means
#Executive summary
#Questions the Court framed
#The issues the Court set itself to decide, in its own words.
- 1.Whether the applicant should be granted extension of time to file an application for certification of an appeal to the Supreme Court as a matter of general public importance
- 2.Whether the delay of about six months in filing the certification application is excusable
- 3.Whether the respondents would suffer undue prejudice if the extension is granted
Key legal issues
#Whether the delay in filing the certification application was excusable
Yes. The delay of about six months was not overly inordinate, and the applicant's engagement in parallel ELC proceedings against its directors was a plausible, uncontroverted explanation.
The court applied the settled Leo Sila Mutiso parameters for extension of time. The applicant's director swore an affidavit explaining that the company was consumed by Environment and Land Court proceedings, including an order to show cause why the directors should not be committed to civil jail and permission to execute directly against them. That explanation was uncontroverted, as the respondents filed no reply or submissions. The court accepted it as plausible and found the delay excusable.
Whether the respondents would be prejudiced by the extension
No prejudice was shown, as the respondents did not oppose the motion or file submissions, so there was no evidence of undue prejudice.
The respondents neither opposed the motion nor filed submissions. In weighing the fourth Leo Sila Mutiso factor, the court held that the absence of any answer to the motion meant there was no evidence that granting the extension would unduly prejudice the respondents. This supported leaning towards granting the extension.
Legal principles established
#- An application for certification of an appeal to the Supreme Court should be filed before and determined by the Court of Appeal at first instance, within 30 days of the judgment sought to be impugned.
- The Rule 4 discretion to extend time is exercised judiciously having regard to the length of and reasons for the delay, the chances of the appeal succeeding, and the degree of prejudice to the respondent.
Court orders
#- 1.The notice of motion dated 18th August 2025 is allowed
- 2.The application for certification shall be filed and served within fourteen (14) days of the order
- 3.No order as to costs
The bench
#One judgment of the whole court — no separate or dissenting opinions.
Wrote the judgment
- Jurisdiction invoked
- Rule 4 of the Court of Appeal Rules (extension of time); certification for appeal to the Supreme Court on a matter of general public importance under Article 163(4)(a) regime
Quotable passages
#Verbatim from the judgment, each located to the page it appears on in the official PDF — so these can be cited and checked directly.
An application for certification should be filed before and determined by the Court of Appeal at the first instance. Such application ought to be made within 30 days of delivery of the judgment sought to be impugned.
first, the length of the delay, secondly, the reasons for the delay, thirdly (possibly) the chances of the appeal succeeding if the application is granted and fourthly the degree of prejudice to the respondent
The notice of motion dated 18th August 2025 is hereby allowed. The application shall be filed and served within fourteen (14) days of this order. No order as to costs.
Issues in the judgment
#The judgment refers to the explaining affidavit as sworn by Ahmed Adan Ali in one paragraph and by Chueb Adan Ali in another, an internal inconsistency in the deponent's name.
Key timeline
#Practical implications
#Frequently asked questions
#Cite this brief
#Cite this brief
Caselaw, "MAS Construction Limited v Sheikh & 6 others (Civil Application E524 of 2025) [2026] KECA 113 (KLR)", Case Analysis (2026). Nairobi Civil Application (Extension of Time) arising from Nairobi Civil Appeal No. E789 of 2023. Source: https://new.kenyalaw.org/akn/ke/judgment/keca/2026/113/eng@2026-01-30
Suggested citation format for research notes or client memos. Always verify the original judgment before relying on any point.