Insolvency Court Hearing Listed: Esin Cash & Carry Ltd and TFC Camberwell Ltd
An application in the Insolvency and Companies Court has been scheduled for 20 July 2026 regarding a matter involving Esin Cash & Carry Limited and TFC Camberwell Limited. The case, referenced CR-2024-006109, highlights a critical risk scenario for creditors and supply chain partners: navigating active litigation against a corporate entity currently facing compulsory strike-off.
For professionals managing credit risk, the intersection of court proceedings and a debtor's statutory filing status requires immediate attention. These overlapping factors directly dictate the priority of claims, the availability of assets, and the legal capacity of the target company to participate in litigation.
Hearing Details
| Detail | Information |
| :--- | :--- |
| Case Number | CR-2024-006109 |
| Date | 20 July 2026 |
| Time | 15:00 |
| Court | Insolvency and Companies Court (Business and Property Courts) |
| Venue | Remote (MS Teams) |
| Case Type | Application |
| Parties | TFC Camberwell Limited & Esin Cash & Carry Limited |
Corporate Status and Statutory Context
Esin Cash & Carry Limited (Company No. 08210735) was incorporated on 12 September 2012. Operating under SIC code 47110 (retail sale in non-specialised stores with food, drinks or tobacco predominating), its registered office is Unit 1-8 Centenary Industrial Estate, Jeffreys Road, Enfield, Middlesex, EN3 7UF.
According to the Companies House register, the company is currently marked as "Active - Proposal to strike off". This status is typically initiated by the Registrar under Section 1000 of the Companies Act 2006 when there is reasonable cause to believe a company is no longer carrying on business or in operation, often due to a failure to file confirmation statements or accounts.
Expert Analysis: Litigation During Strike-Off
The presence of an active court application alongside a compulsory strike-off notice requires decisive intervention. If a company is dissolved under s.1000, it ceases to exist as a legal entity. Its assets pass to the Crown as bona vacantia. Consequently, any ongoing litigation-including applications in the Insolvency and Companies List-becomes fundamentally defective because the defendant entity lacks legal capacity.
Creditors or counterparties involved in litigation must actively manage the Companies House register to keep the target entity alive until the court delivers its judgment.
Realistic Worked Example
A commercial landlord is pursuing rent arrears from a retail tenant via a court application. Simultaneously, the tenant fails to file their annual accounts, triggering a compulsory strike-off initiated by the Registrar. If the landlord ignores the First Gazette notice, the tenant dissolves, extinguishing both the legal entity and the debt. To prevent this, the landlord's solicitor must urgently file an objection to the strike-off with Companies House, providing evidence of the ongoing court application. This places a statutory 'Stop' on the dissolution process, ensuring the tenant remains an active legal entity capable of being subject to a court order.
Creditor Action Checklist
When a counterparty is simultaneously involved in court applications and facing strike-off, corporate intelligence analysts and legal teams should follow a strict verification framework:
1. Verify statutory status: Check the public register for active strike-off proposals and confirm if a 'Stop' code indicates an objection has already been lodged.
2. Lodge an objection: Submit evidence of the outstanding debt or ongoing litigation to the Registrar to suspend the dissolution.
3. Assess secured debt: Perform a company charge check to identify prior-ranking floating charges over the company's inventory or premises that might dilute unsecured recoveries.
4. Identify competing actions: Run a winding up petition search to ensure no other creditor has escalated enforcement ahead of your claim.
5. Monitor statutory notices: Check The Gazette for the publication of the First Gazette notice, which dictates the statutory timeline for dissolution.
Traditional Monitoring vs Corp Intel
Professionals managing supply chain risk traditionally rely on ad-hoc searches of the public register or manual reviews of the weekly Gazette publications. This creates a dangerous latency period. A First Gazette notice might be published on a Tuesday, but if the credit control team only checks the register at month-end, the window to object to a dissolution is significantly compressed, jeopardising the recovery strategy.
Corp Intel replaces this manual tracking with automated intelligence. By configuring free company monitoring, legal and finance teams receive immediate notifications the moment a strike-off proposal is gazetted, a charge is registered, or a court hearing is listed. This ensures practitioners have the maximum possible timeframe to lodge objections, instruct counsel, and protect their commercial position without wasting billable hours on manual data gathering.
***
Disclaimer: This report summarises entries on the published court cause list. Presentation of a petition or an application is not a determination of insolvency; the outcome is a matter for the court. Companies believing they are named incorrectly should email contact@corp-intel.co.uk.