This is a clear case of a court (CNBC/MCOL) error, with one caveat, which I'll come to later. Regardless of the fact that your defence was filed one day late, it was received before the default judgment was entered. That means a default judgment should never have been entered at all.
Under Civil Procedure Rule 12.3(1), default judgment can only be entered if the defendant has not filed a defence at the time the claimant requests judgment. Once a defence is filed, even if it's late, the claim no longer qualifies for default judgment. If a claimant wants to deal with a late defence, their proper route is to apply to strike it out or apply for summary judgment. Not default.
Since your defence was emailed on Wednesday 28th May and the judgment was entered on Monday 2nd June, the court, technically, had your defence before the judgment was entered. The court should have rejected the claimant’s request for default judgment. This means the judgment was wrongly entered, and under CPR 13.2, the court must set it aside. There is no discretion. The wording of the rule is clear – if judgment was wrongly entered, it must be set aside.
This is not a CPR 3.9 situation (relief from sanction for late filing). You're not asking the court to forgive the lateness – you're saying the judgment should never have been entered because the defence was already in before the date of judgment.
Now, to the caveat I mentioned earlier... the timings of submission are important, not just the dates.
Defence emailed on Wednesday 28 May:If this was sent after court working hours (typically after 4:00pm), it will not be treated as received until the next working day, which would be Thursday 29th May, in line with CPR 6.26 and general court administrative practice.
Default judgment request on MCOL:A claimant can request default judgment on MCOL as soon as the deadline passes, and this is automated and instantaneous — i.e., once the system shows no defence has been logged, the Claimant can press the button. It’s very likely that the Claimant requested default on Thursday 29th or Friday 30th May, before the defence was manually processed by the court (which may have taken a few days).
Judgment date shown in MCOL as Monday 2nd June:This is likely the processing date — not necessarily the date the judgment was made. The date the system logs as the default judgment date may reflect internal batching or confirmation by a court officer, but not the exact moment the claimant initiated the request or the date the default judgment was actually made. The letter from the court either the default judgment will show the date the actual judgment was made.
This is the grey area... if the Claimant’s request for judgment was submitted on 29th or 30th May, and the defence was not marked as received on the system until after that, then technically the default judgment may not have been improperly entered — even though it's deeply frustrating.
That said, even in these cases, it’s reasonable to argue that:
• The defence was lodged in substance before the judgment was entered, even if processed slightly later.
• The court had actual notice (via your email timestamp and auto-acknowledgement).
• The situation was caused by slow administrative processing, not by your inaction.
Therefore, it would be unjust to hold the defendant to a default judgment entered in such marginal circumstances.
You could email the CNBC and ask them to review this and refer it to a judge. Emphasise that the defence was sent before any judgment was entered, even if the court's system logged it later.
The CNCB may simply put the request before a judge if you can convince them that the defence was received by the CNCB BEFORE any default judgment was requested/initiated by the Claimant. However, they are also just as likely to simply tell you to submit an N244 application for a set aside.
If you do file an N244, you can argue:
• There is a good reason for the delay (only one day late, explained).
• The claim lacks merit (include a draft defence again).
• The default judgment was entered while the court already had the defence email, and you’re applying without delay.
• Therefore, the court should exercise discretion under CPR 13.3 if CPR 13.2 is not accepted.
This is a classic example of what can happen if the filing deadlines are not met, even by a day. What you also have to take into account now, is that if the CCJ is not paid in full within 30 days of judgment, it will appear on your credit file and, should it not be set aside, will remain there for 6 years, causing a lot of financial pain.
If you do apply for a set aside, whilst an application under CPR 13.2 is a mandatory set aside, a set aside under CPR 13.3 is at the discretion of the court. However, as long as you can show that you had a good prospect of successfully defending the claim, it is very likely that the court will set it aside. The problem is who bears the costs of the £313 set aside application (N244)?
So, if you can persuade the CNBC to correct this under their administrative powers, then it won't cost you anything. However, if you have to pay to apply for a set aside, there is no guarantee that you will get that fee back, even if you were to successfully defend the claim after set aside.