R v Bhadresh Gohil & Anor

R v Bhadresh Gohil & Anor

The application to vacate the hearing was rejected because no good reason was shown for counsel's lack of preparation or delayed instruction, the grounds for appeal were already settled and comprehensible, and vacating the hearing would cause unfair prejudice and delay contrary to the interests of justice.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Bhadresh Gohil; Applicant: James Ibori
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Adjournment of Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Confiscation Order
Outcome
application for adjournment rejected
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Leave to Appeal, Confiscation Order, Procedural Fairness
Criminal Law Confiscation Proceedings Adjournment Leave to Appeal Confiscation Order Procedural Fairness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Bhadresh Gohil

Applicant

James Ibori

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Adjournment of Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Confiscation Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearing of the renewed application for leave to appeal against confiscation orders should be adjourned
  2. 2 Whether sufficient grounds exist for vacating the hearing date
  3. 3 Whether procedural fairness and equality of arms require an adjournment

Ratio Decidendi

The application to vacate the hearing was rejected because no good reason was shown for counsel's lack of preparation or delayed instruction, the grounds for appeal were already settled and comprehensible, and vacating the hearing would cause unfair prejudice and delay contrary to the interests of justice.

Court Disposition

application for adjournment rejected

Orders

  • The hearing date is not vacated.
  • No further oral submissions permitted beyond those contained in the CLP letters.