CPR 3.8 (4) contains a “buffer command.” This allows the parties to agree an additional period of time between them without recourse to the jurisdiction, in the absence of a sanction in the event of non-compliance with a specified deadline. This depends on whether a written agreement is reached beforehand and an extension does not compromise the date of the hearing. (2) If the defendant and the plaintiff are in favour of an extension of the defence period, the defendant must provide it in writing to the Tribunal. A defendant who wishes to defend all or part of a claim must be held accountable in court (CPR 15.2). CPR 16 defines what the defence should contain. There are exceptions to the general rule of RPC 2.11 that parties may agree to extend the time to comply with a rule or direction without seeking a court order. We looked at CPR 15.5 and CPR 3.8 (3) above. CPR 3.13 requires the Tribunal to agree to an extension of the 21-day period for the presentation and exchange of a cost budget before the first administrative case conference. Other general limitations can be found in RPC 26.3 (the date of filing of a route questionnaire) and in RPC 29.5 (date for a case management conference, preliminary examination, court checklist, trial or trial period, or any date that applies to this data). (b) no defendant was admitted, admitted, did not bring an action or counter-appeal; and (d) Rule 6.12 (3) (which requires the court to set the period for responding to the information of the claim when making an order under this rule). (b) Rule 11 (which provides that the defendant, when he lodges an appeal of the Tribunal`s jurisdiction, is not obliged to bring a defence brief before the oral proceedings); RPC 3.8 (3) stipulates that the parties cannot extend the deadline by mutual agreement when a rule sets out the consequences of not meeting a deadline. This rule led to an avalanche of requests for extensions after the Court of Appeal decided to take a much stricter approach to non-compliance with deadlines under the jackson reforms (Mitchell v News Group Newspapers Ltd). Time extensions for defence facilities are probably a grey area.
RPC 15.5 contains regulations that allow parties to agree on an additional 28 days for the filing of a defence, under which a defendant is required to appear in court if he needs more time. It is not immediately clear that the new situation covers this situation (although the point can be seen), so that parties who confuse on the side of prudence can approach the court to request the necessary extension of time. 15.2 A defendant who wants to defend all or part of a claim must defend himself. When a defence brief is filed with the Tribunal, a copy of the defence is attributed to any other party to the proceedings. This is not only the plaintiff, but all the other defendants (CPR 15.6). The parties may agree to a maximum of 28 days for the defence, but the Tribunal`s authorization is required for a longer extension (CPR 15.5). For example, in the part 8 claims, section 7.5 provides a mechanism for the parties to agree on additional time for the service and presentation of evidence. This amount is capped at 14 days for a defendant after submitting his performance confirmation and for a plaintiff who received the evidence in response, 28 days after providing the evidence provided by the defendant. It is not clear that the new one covers that part of the rules, so the parties can still go to court for an additional extension beyond 14 or 28 days, as is necessary. Another curiosity is that the specific rule that applies to the filing of a defence has not been changed by the new direction of practice. However, the parties may agree to extend the period by 28 days rather than (CPR 15.5 (1)).