Mincoff Science & Gold (Now Known As "Mincoffs Solicitors") v Ganatra [2001] EWCA Civ 373 (8 March 2001)

Mincoff Science & Gold (Now Known As "Mincoffs Solicitors") v Ganatra [2001] EWCA Civ 373 (8 March 2001)

There was no arguable ground for the proposed appeal as the defence and counterclaim disclosed no reasonable grounds, and there was no evidence of negligence by the claimants. The application for an extension of time was therefore refused and the application for permission to appeal was dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2001] EWCA Civ 373
Parties
Claimant: Mincoff Science and Gold (now known as Mincoffs Solicitors); Defendant: Mr Jayesh Ganatra
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Striking Out Defence, Negligence by Solicitors, Costs
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Extension of Time Striking Out Defence Negligence by Solicitors Costs

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mincoff Science and Gold (now known as Mincoffs Solicitors)

Claimant

Mr Jayesh Ganatra

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant should be granted an extension of time to appeal against the order striking out his defence and counterclaim
  2. 2 Whether the defence and counterclaim disclosed reasonable grounds
  3. 3 Whether the claimants were negligent in their conduct as solicitors

Ratio Decidendi

There was no arguable ground for the proposed appeal as the defence and counterclaim disclosed no reasonable grounds, and there was no evidence of negligence by the claimants. The application for an extension of time was therefore refused and the application for permission to appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal dismissed
  • Request for further adjournment refused