Can parties agree twenty-eight more days for a procedural step?

In the circumstances covered by CPR 3.8(3), parties may agree an extension in advance and in writing for up to twenty-eight days. The agreement must not put any hearing date at risk, and the court may order otherwise. The maximum is not an automatic new deadline.

Responsible actor. The parties considering a prior written extension agreement.

The actual original requirement and valid prior written agreement

Rule 3.8(4) applies within the circumstances specified in rule 3.8(3) and unless the court orders otherwise.

Establish the sanctioned requirement, actual agreed duration, timing of agreement, court restrictions and hearing risk. A blanket twenty-eight-day addition cannot determine every extended deadline.

1. The actual written agreement supplies any additional duration. Read its operative date and underlying requirement; do not replace it with the maximum cap.
2. The agreement must be prior and written, and no extension may put a hearing date at risk.

The actual written agreement supplies any additional duration. Read its operative date and underlying requirement; do not replace it with the maximum cap.

Any closure treatment belongs to the underlying filing or service act. The agreement does not make all procedural deadlines court-office acts.

Establish the sanctioned requirement, actual agreed duration, timing of agreement, court restrictions and hearing risk. A blanket twenty-eight-day addition cannot determine every extended deadline. The agreement must be prior and written, and no extension may put a hearing date at risk.

The parties validly agree ten extra days in advance and in writing. Ten days, rather than the maximum twenty-eight, is the actual agreed duration. Check the underlying act and valid agreement before counting.

The extended date falls when the court office is closed. The underlying obligation may involve filing, service or both. Apply only the closure rule appropriate to the actual act.

An extension would jeopardize a hearing date. Rule 3.8(4) does not permit that agreement route. Seek the appropriate court direction rather than add the maximum.

Applicable procedure

Rule 3.8(4) applies within the circumstances specified in rule 3.8(3) and unless the court orders otherwise.

Material qualification

The agreement must be prior and written, and no extension may put a hearing date at risk.

Completion and variation

Rule 29.5 restricts changes affecting the multi-track hearing, pre-trial checklist and trial timetable.

• Establish the sanctioned requirement, actual agreed duration, timing of agreement, court restrictions and hearing risk. A blanket twenty-eight-day addition cannot determine every extended deadline.
• An extension agreement differs from relief after a sanction and from changing a fixed hearing or trial timetable.

• The parties considering a prior written extension agreement must identify the controlling document and preserve the actual procedural record.
• Preserve the prior written agreement and check the court’s order. Where agreement is unavailable or a sanction has taken effect, consider the actual application and relief procedure.
• Rule 29.5 restricts changes affecting the multi-track hearing, pre-trial checklist and trial timetable.
• Preserve the prior written agreement and check the court’s order. Where agreement is unavailable or a sanction has taken effect, consider the actual application and relief procedure.