Bimal's bio

Bimal qualified as a solicitor advocate, with higher rights of audience in civil litigation, in 2012. After working at a boutique litigation law firm in Middle Temple, London, Bimal joined Grant Saw in 2016.

Bimal specialises in a multitude of property related disputes such as property co-ownership disputes, property related negligence claims, landlord & tenant disputes, lease renewals, dilapidations claims, trespass, party wall matters and boundary disputes.

He has considerable experience in contentious insolvency matters and is regularly instructed by insolvency practitioners and former directors of companies. Bimal’s areas of expertise include representing clients in winding-up petitions, bankruptcy petitions, directors’ disqualification proceedings and misfeasance and antecedent transaction claims

Bimal has a keen interest in contractual disputes and commercial litigation alongside tax disputes and defending clients accused of white collar crime offences, such as fraud, tax evasion and prosecutions brought by Trading Standards.

Bimal frequently assists clients in contentious probate matters which range from advising on claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family Dependants) Act 1975 to challenging the validity of wills. His particular expertise lies in testators lacking capacity or being unduly influenced by friends/family. His extensive knowledge of the ACTAPS code regularly leads to cases being settled without court intervention.

His tenacious approach to his cases has resulted in success against large institutions and government departments such as financial services institutions (major banks and insurance companies), Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs, the Home Office, the Insolvency Service, Trading Standards departments as well as the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).

Bimal’s recent work includes:

  • Successfully setting aside a statutory demand which resulted in the petitioner paying for the client’s costs;
  • Successfully defending a client whose family members sought beneficial entitlement to a portfolio of properties owned by him.
  • Regularly obtaining residential possession orders for clients seeking to evict their tenants, usually without the need for a hearing;
  • Successfully defending a misfeasance claim valued at £250,000 brought by a liquidator, by demonstrating that a former director acted reasonably and honestly.
  • Obtaining a favourable outcome for a Landlord in respect of a dilapidations claim;

Bimal’s interests include travelling, movies, sport, and socialising with friends and family.


Bimal Kotecha Services

Articles by Bimal Kotecha

  • 19 Mar

    Grenfell style cladding – Who pays?

    Following the Grenfell disaster last year, the government introduced new regulations which require building owners who have “Grenfell style cladding” to have it replaced. However, the main question that arises, is who pays for the cost of replacing the cladding?
  • 07 Feb

    The Government demands Carillion’s directors’ past and present be investigated. What are the Liquidator’s powers?

    On Monday 15 January 2018, Carillion PLC, one of the UK’s biggest construction firms, and 5 associated companies, entered into the formal insolvency process known as Liquidation.

    It is reported that the company has a staggering

  • 06 Apr

    When tweets become twibels….

    Staff operating social media feeds for business should be made aware of the responsibility of publishing through such routes and be given clear boundaries to operate within to avoid breaching publishing law or advertising regulations.
  • 10 Oct

    Safeguarding design is a priority for smaller business

    Registered design fees have been reduced with effect from 1st October so businesses can afford to respond to the recent Trunki case to safeguard their IP more comprehensively. They should also consider the implications of Brexit on both new and existing registrations.
  • 09 Aug

    Clamp down for employers who call a spade a shovel

    Reminder to employers that the status of a worker or contractor is determined by what they do, not by their title. Examples include the legal action faced by Uber from drivers claiming they are workers, not self-employed ‘partners’, and graduates being offered