No way did he go there vs No way could he have gone there.

They are correct, depending upon the context in which they are found. The first sentence is awkward, however, and one would probably not encounter such a locution in formal, written English.

I remember in the 1970s a newspaper report of a case at the London Old Bailey (the Central Criminal Court, where the most serious cases are tried by very senior judges, usually very conservative in use of language). The newsworthy feature was that the judge had used the phrase "no way" in his summing up. He didn't start the sentence with "No way", that is still, now, a rank Americanism, he said something like "The defence says there is no way the witness could have seen the robbery from his car". I must admit that if I wish to express impossibility or refusal in (very) casual conversation I might say "No way José!".

Tes yeux reminded me of the glaring fault which makes neither sentence correct in formal written or spoken English. That is the lack of a subject and verb to introduce "no way" into the structure of the sentence. "There is" functions for that purpose, as in the example which Tex yeux provides. In this case, there acts as a pronoun, and the subject for the use of the verb to be.

There is no way did he go there. (Still an awkward locution, the use of which is inadvisable.

There is no way he could have gone there.

Thanks, Tes yeux noirs and Setanta.

My interpretation of this is "He definitely did not go there".


My interpretation of this is "It is definitely not possible that he went there", or "It was definitely not possible for him to go there".

Thanks, Tes yeux noirs.