Administrative Court Practice Statement: Opposed applications for extensions of time
1. Litigants, their legal representatives, Court staff and judges are all entitled to plan their work on the basis that time limits set by the Civil Procedure Rules and Practice Directions and in directions given by the Court will be adhered to.
2. Too many applications for extensions of time are being made at the last minute and/or without proper supporting reasons or evidence, apparently in the belief that the application will not be considered until the applicant has had the extra time sought, so the extension will become a fait accompli.
3. This is unfair to the other parties and their legal representatives. It is likely to have a particular adverse effect on litigants and legal representatives with caring responsibilities and on legal representatives who work part-time. It may also inconvenience the Court.
4. From now on, the following procedure will apply to all Administrative Court work in London, except in Planning Court cases:
a) A party intending to apply for an extension of time should seek agreement from each other party before making the application.
b) If a party objects to another party’s application for an extension of time, they or their legal representative should send an email to the Administrative Court Office, copied to the other parties or their legal representatives, with “EOTOBJECTION” in CAPITALS in the subject header, explaining the reasons for objection and attaching any supporting documents. Except in extradition cases, the email should be sent to:
administrativecourtoffice.generaloffice@justice.gov.uk
In extradition cases, the email should be sent to:
administrativecourtoffice.crimex@justice.gov.uk
c) Marking emails in this way will enable staff to identify the extension application as time-critical and to issue the application as a matter of priority.
d) The application and objection will then be sent to a duty ACO lawyer with delegated powers under CPR 54.1A and/or Crim PR 2.6 to make an order as soon as possible, ideally within one working day of the objection being notified.
e) Any request for reconsideration by a judge should also have “EOTOBJECTION” in the subject line.
f) On each working day, one duty judge or deputy judge will be available to deal with time-critical applications for reconsideration of lawyers’ decisions. Ideally such applications will be decided by within one working day of the request for reconsideration.
g) Litigants and legal representatives should not assume that the extension sought (or any extension) will be granted.
5. This procedure does not apply to:
a) applications to extend time to file the claim form – these will usually be dealt with by the judge who determines permission on the papers;
b) applications for extensions of time to file form 86B (requesting reconsideration at an oral hearing) – these are usually dealt with at the oral permission hearing;
c) applications to extend time to file a statutory appeal;
d) renewed applications for permission to appeal in any statutory appeal.
6. After considering feedback from Court users, the new procedure may be extended to Administrative Court centres outside London and to Planning Court claims.
Mr Justice Chamberlain
Judge in Charge of the Administrative Court
6 March 2026