Eco Green Capital Ltd v Wetzel [2026] EWHC 800 (KB) (01 April 2026)

Eco Green Capital Ltd v Wetzel [2026] EWHC 800 (KB) (01 April 2026)

The claim form was properly addressed and served as the address provided, including the correct postcode, uniquely identified the defendant's residence; the omission of 'Heads Lane' was immaterial. The defendant failed to open her post, causing the default. The application to set aside judgment was not prompt, and there was no satisfactory explanation for the delay. The Denton test was not satisfied, and the judge's refusal to set aside the judgment was correct.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 800 (KB)
Parties
Claimant/respondent: ECO GREEN CAPITAL LIMITED; Appellant/defendant: Angela Wetzel; Third Party Intervenor: SHCE LIMITED T/A THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Refusal to Set Aside Default Judgment and Stay Execution
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Service of Process, Default Judgment, Setting Aside Judgment, Relief From Sanctions, Address for Service, Promptness in Applications
Civil Procedure Service of Process Default Judgment Setting Aside Judgment Relief From Sanctions Address for Service Promptness in Applications

Case Brief

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ECO GREEN CAPITAL LIMITED

Claimant/respondent

Angela Wetzel

Appellant/defendant

SHCE LIMITED T/A THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE

Third Party Intervenor

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Refusal to Set Aside Default Judgment and Stay Execution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim form was correctly addressed and served under CPR 6.6(2)
  2. 2 Whether the defendant had a real prospect of successfully defending the claim under CPR 13.3
  3. 3 Whether the application to set aside judgment was made promptly and satisfied the Denton test

Ratio Decidendi

The claim form was properly addressed and served as the address provided, including the correct postcode, uniquely identified the defendant's residence; the omission of 'Heads Lane' was immaterial. The defendant failed to open her post, causing the default. The application to set aside judgment was not prompt, and there was no satisfactory explanation for the delay. The Denton test was not satisfied, and the judge's refusal to set aside the judgment was correct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Default judgment stands
  • Costs to the claimant/respondent as previously ordered