When a business receives a County Court Judgment, the consequences can be serious — affecting credit facilities, supplier relationships, and commercial reputation.

This case study highlights how we helped a limited company successfully set aside a CCJ issued by Companies House, represented by Shakespeare Martineau LLP, through a fully contested court application and advocacy hearing.

Background: CCJ Issued Against a Limited Company

On 11 April 2025, our client — a limited company — instructed us to assist with removing their County Court Judgment.

The judgment had been issued by Companies House due to:

• Late filing of statutory documents

• Non-receipt of Court documentation

• Administrative failings attributed to their accountant

The company proceeded with our Full Business CCJ Consent Order service at a fixed fee of £599.00.

The matter was assigned to our case handler on 16 April 2025.

Taking Detailed Instructions from the Directors

We immediately contacted the company’s directors to discuss the background in detail.

It became clear that:

• The directors had not personally received the Court documentation

• Filing failures were linked to accountant negligence

• The business had not intentionally ignored proceedings

For business CCJs, it is essential to demonstrate both procedural issues and a genuine intention to address the underlying matter.

After taking full instructions, we drafted detailed Witness Statements for each director, clearly explaining:

• The circumstances surrounding the late filing

• The issue of non-receipt

• The reliance on their accountant

• The company’s position once aware of the judgment

Attempting Resolution by Consent

Once approved, the Witness Statements were formally presented to Shakespeare Martineau LLP on 25 April 2025, alongside a proposed Consent Order seeking agreement to set aside the CCJ.

However, the claimant’s solicitors responded to confirm that they considered service to have been effective and were not prepared to provide consent.

While this was disappointing, it did not end the matter.

Proceeding Without Consent: N244 Application

We advised the client of their options.

The directors elected to proceed with a formal N244 application without consent, upgrading their service for a £199.00 additional fee to allow us to prepare a more detailed contested application.

This required:

• Expanded legal submissions

• Strengthened supporting evidence

• Detailed procedural arguments

• Preparation for a potential hearing

Following further discussions and refinement of the documentation, the finalised application was filed with the Court on 08 May 2025.

Matter Transferred and Listed for Hearing

The case was subsequently transferred to a County Court and listed for a hearing in July 2025.

At this stage, the client instructed us to provide advocacy support for the hearing. This was undertaken by our Director and experienced Advocate, Mr Luke Memory, who attended alongside the directors.

Business CCJ hearings require careful presentation, particularly where consent has been refused. The Court will consider:

• Whether service was properly effected

• Whether the application was made promptly

• Whether there is a real prospect of defending the claim or other compelling reason

Court Orders the Judgment Set Aside

At the hearing, the Court ordered that the judgment be set aside.

This was a significant outcome for the business, as it meant:

• The CCJ was removed

• The judgment was no longer enforceable

• The company’s credit profile could be restored

• The directors could move forward without reputational damage

From instruction to resolution, the matter was concluded in approximately four months end-to-end.

Timeline Overview

Key dates:

• 11 April 2025 – Client instructs CCJ Removal Services

• 16 April 2025 – Case assigned

• 25 April 2025 – Consent Order proposed

• 08 May 2025 – N244 application filed (without consent)

• July 2025 – Hearing listed and attended

• July 2025 – Judgment set aside

Why This Case Was Successful

1. Detailed Witness Evidence

Comprehensive statements from each director strengthened the application.

2. Strategic Escalation

When consent was refused, we immediately pivoted to a contested N244 application.

3. Prompt Filing

The application was issued quickly after instruction.

4. Professional Advocacy

Representation at the hearing ensured the case was presented clearly and persuasively.

5. Strong Procedural Arguments

We addressed service issues and demonstrated that the company acted promptly once aware.

Business CCJs Can Have Serious Consequences

A CCJ against a limited company can:

• Damage business credit ratings

• Affect supplier relationships

• Impact funding and lending applications

• Harm commercial reputation

However, even where consent is refused, a CCJ can still be successfully set aside with the correct legal approach.

Our Full Business CCJ Removal Service

For business clients, we offer:

• Full case assessment

• Drafting of director Witness Statements

• Negotiation with claimant solicitors

• Consent Order applications

• Contested N244 applications

• Court hearing preparation

• Advocacy support where required

We manage the entire process from start to finish.

Another Successful Business Outcome

This case demonstrates that even when a claimant refuses consent, a business CCJ can still be removed through a properly prepared and argued court application.

Through structured preparation, strategic escalation, and experienced advocacy, we achieved a successful outcome and protected the company’s financial future.

Need Help Removing a Business CCJ?

If your limited company has received a CCJ, early professional advice is essential.

Contact CCJ Removal Services today to discuss your case and explore your options for removing your business CCJ.