Martyn Gooch

Partner

Martyn Gooch

Martyn is a partner who heads up the litigation and dispute resolution department at Rohan Solicitors. Martyn is an experienced litigator with notable trial experience and expertise in Civil Procedure. With over a decade’s experience in the field, Martyn has retained an excellent settlement success rate.

Martyn conducts legal proceedings for both Claimants and Defendants in the County Court and High Court. He has extensive experience advising commercial and individual clients and his varied caseload ranges from negligence and breach of contract claims through unravelling complex right of way and misrepresentation matters to resolving shareholder disputes and defective product claims. Martyn also regularly advises clients on matters concerning insolvency and bankruptcy.

Martyn offers swift and effective advice tailored to his client’s individual needs. As a keen advocate of alternative dispute resolution Martyn takes a pragmatic and realistic approach towards settlement based on his client’s prospects of success. He will also, where appropriate, advise on the advantages of settling cases out of court.

Martyn joined the firm as a trainee solicitor in 2009 and qualified in 2011. He was appointed as a Partner early 2018.

Experience / Interests

Varsani v Relfo Ltd (in liquidation) [2010] EWCA Civ 560, All ER (D) 272 and Relfo v Varsani [2014] EWCA Civ 360

Acted at various stages of the two legal actions. This was a complex commercial case, concluding in the Court of Appeal, regarding the alleged laundering of monies. It has subsequently become the leading authority on the law of tracing. Is also now a major authority on unjust enrichment. Additionally, the case determined and clarified the test to be applied when considering the provisions of Part 6 of the Civil Procedure Rules and the decision on the point is recorded in the White Book.

Hives v Machin [2017] EWHC 1414 (Ch)

Represented a beneficiary in a case surrounding the application of section 33 of the Wills Act 1837 and interpretation of the phase ‘contrary intention’. The High Court clarified the position in respect of this discrete area of law and held that the child of the beneficiary that had predeceased the testatrix should inherit her Father’s share of the residuary estate as the Will did expressly exclude the provisions of section 33 nor was there good evidence of an intention that it should not apply. The decision allowed the child of the beneficiary to inherit.

Represented a creditor in the widely reported bankruptcy case of former billionaire James Stunt supporting two high value creditors bankruptcy petitions and assisted with obtaining a bankruptcy order.

Opposed proceedings issued against the lead singer of an alternative rock band, successfully defending the claim, having it struck out and obtaining a Civil Restraint Order preventing the Claimant from issuing any form of court proceedings for a period of 2 years- one of only 14 that were granted by the courts in that calendar year.

Contested a fiercely fought claim to remove exit gates over a residential driveway at a high net worth property. Successfully persuading the Claimant to discontinue its claim midway through a three-day trial.

Acted for a Defendant in a claim that required expert analysis of the terms and scope of a right of way. Succeeded in persuading the court that the words used to describe of the right of way contained in the deeds had a material impact on how that right can be exercised.

Connect on LinkedIn
Areas of Expertise
Debt Recovery
Breach of Contract
Insolvency
Dispute Resolution
Civil Litigation
Contentious Probate
Property Disputes
Testimonials

What people say

From private individuals to businesses, we love to get honest feedback about our legal services.