National Listing Framework – Court Listing Plan: National Template
This template is issued to assist Resident Judges in preparing the Court Listing Plan required for each Crown Court centre by Chapter 4 §24 of the Practice Direction on Listing in the Criminal Courts (“the CrimPDL”). It should be read with Guidance Note No. 7.
Plans should follow the structure and headings of this template. A common structure means that a practitioner appearing at several centres finds the same material under the same heading, and that Presiding Judges can review the Plans of a whole circuit against a common framework.
Guidance Note No. 7 explains what belongs in the Plan and what may remain in separate local guidance. Two model Plans are issued with this template, for a medium and a small centre; they show the same template completed in materially different ways.
Coloured italic passages are drafting notes and should be removed before submission for approval.
1.Status, approval and version
| Crown Court centre | [ ] |
| Resident Judge | [ ] |
| Approved by | [ ], Presiding Judge, [ ] Circuit |
| Approved / published | [date] / [date] |
| Version | [ ] · next review due [ ] |
| LISTING AT THIS CENTRE | |
| Form of Flexible Date listing | [Option A — specified date / Option B — defined period] |
| Case Progression Meeting | [day and time] |
| Representations about listing | [route] — by [deadline] |
| Listing enquiries | [monitored inbox] |
| Advance List / Firm List | [day, four weeks before] / [day, two weeks before] |
| Trial-date variation by agreement | [circumstances under Ch4 §9(d), or “none”] |
| Local initiatives | [Short Trial Court / Review Court / other — or “none”] |
This page summarises information set out in full in the sections which follow.
This Court Listing Plan is made under Chapter 4 §24 of the CrimPDL and is supplemental to it. It explains how the National Listing Framework operates at this court centre and identifies the local listing arrangements adopted under Chapter 2 §3. It cannot override the CrimPDL, any guidance or direction issued by the Senior Presiding Judge, or a judicial order or direction in an individual case.
The paragraph above states the position at every centre and may be retained without amendment.
2. Court-Centre profile and available capacity
A short description of the centre and any local feature which materially affects listing.
[Number and broad type of courtrooms ordinarily available, and any linked or annexe sites.]
[Any courtrooms or hearing facilities regularly used for remote or hybrid hearings, and any material effect on listing capacity.]
[Where the centre forms part of a combined court centre, or shares courtrooms with other jurisdictions, how that affects the Crown Court capacity available.]
[Any material custody, accessibility, security, interpreter or technology constraint affecting how work can be listed.]
[The broad profile of the centre’s workload.]
3. Local listing arrangements under Chapter 2 §3
Continuing local arrangements are recorded in this section. Describe each arrangement well enough for a court user to understand what it is and why it exists. Detailed operating instructions may stay in separate local guidance. Arrangements described in full elsewhere in the Plan are cross-referred under “Other standing arrangements” below, so that this section still lists everything on which the centre relies.
[Name of arrangement]
[What it is, why the centre operates it, which cases it affects, and where any detailed procedure is held. Repeat for each arrangement.]
Other standing arrangements
- [Arrangement — section [ ].]
Cross-refer to any listing arrangement described in full elsewhere in the Plan — for example shared capacity, a local initiative, reserved video-link sessions, or a cross-centre arrangement.
Arrangements arising from separate local guidance
[Whether the centre maintains separate local guidance containing a local listing arrangement and, if so, the arrangement. If it does not, say so.] Any local listing arrangement relating to section 28 must be consistent with Ch4 §5: the fact that cross-examination has been pre-recorded does not itself reduce the priority of the case.
4. Allocation of trial and non-trial capacity
Chapter 4 §24(c) requires the Plan to explain how capacity is allocated among types of work and Priority Tiers. Describe the ordinary approach and any material constraints. The proportions may change with the work available.
[Define what this Plan means by short work, and set out the ordinary listing profile.]
[How sufficient Fixed Date capacity is maintained for higher-priority trials and other urgent work, and how Tier 3 and Tier 4 trials are accommodated.]
[How longer trials, specialist work and work requiring particular judicial authorisation are managed, and how material capacity pressures reach the Resident Judge.]
Where a settled local sitting pattern materially affects how work can be listed, describe it briefly. Routine sitting times and adjournments need not be recorded unless they form part of the centre’s listing model.
[Any settled sitting pattern which materially affects the allocation of trial and non-trial work.]
This Plan does not allocate a fixed proportion of capacity to individual Priority Tiers. Priority Tiers guide the relative priority of individual cases; they are not quotas for the use of courtrooms.
5. Fixed Date and Flexible Date arrangements
All trial listings at this centre are designated as either a Fixed Date (1F) or a Flexible Date (2F). The superseded expressions “backer”, “floater”, “fixed floater” and “priority floater” are not used.
Tiers 1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 are ordinarily listed as Fixed Date. Tiers 3 and 4 are ordinarily listed as Flexible Date. The court may depart from that allocation where the interests of justice require, including where doing so would permit a materially earlier trial date (Ch4 §3(b)).
The two paragraphs above state the national position and may be retained unamended. Everything which follows is local.
The form of Flexible Date listing used at this centre
Choose one: Ch4 §2(e) requires the Plan to specify which of the two forms permitted by Ch4 §2(d) the centre uses. Delete the option not adopted.
§2(d) the centre uses. Delete the option not adopted.
Option A — specified date. A Flexible Date case is listed for a specified date, which may include listing to follow a Fixed Date trial, with the expectation that if it is not reached on that date it will be accommodated within one or two days and, in any event, within the same week.
Option B — defined period. A Flexible Date case is listed to be called on at any time during a defined period, which does not exceed one week.
Assignment of a specific date
So far as practicable, a specific date for the commencement of the trial is assigned not less than two weeks before the beginning of the listing period (Ch4 §2(f)). [How and by whom that date is assigned, and how it is communicated.]
Allocation at the plea and trial preparation hearing
[How the Priority Tier and listing type are determined and recorded, and how the designation is communicated to the parties. Include any preliminary date-offering arrangement used before the PTPH.]
6. Use of shared trial capacity
If more than one case may be listed against the same trial capacity, describe when that is done and how the safeguards in Chapter 4 §4 are met. If capacity is not shared, say so briefly.
[When and why the centre lists more than one case against available capacity, and how many.]
[How the parties are told; how the case which will proceed is identified, and when; how unnecessary attendance is minimised; and the route by which a Fixed Date at risk is referred for judicial decision (Ch4 §8(c)).]
A higher Priority Tier does not automatically displace a case already listed. Where accommodating one case would require another trial to be moved, that is a fresh judicial listing decision in both cases.
7. Local initiatives
Required by Ch4 §24(c). Describe any Short Trial Court, Review Court or other local initiative, such as e.g. the Domestic Abuse Best Listing Scheme or any other expedited trial scheme. Where the centre operates none, this should be stated expressly.
A Short Trial Court may take cases earlier than their Priority Tier would otherwise indicate (Ch4 §11), subject to Senior Presiding Judge guidance. A Review Court involves judicial and courtroom capacity allocated for a limited period to review selected outstanding trials (Ch4 §12).
[For each initiative: its purpose, the cases it takes, who decides, and how it interacts with the ordinary tier and listing-type allocation.]
8. The run-up to trial
Describe how the Advance List, readiness review, Case Progression Meeting and Firm List operate here, including who is responsible. The national timetable is in Chapter 4 §7 and need not be reproduced.
[Introduce the local process, and confirm the position on trial estimates.]
| Advance List | [where and when published, four weeks before the trial week] |
| Certificates of Trial Readiness | [when directed, when served, where filed] |
| Case Progression Meeting | [day, time, and how held] |
| [Any local review] | [who, and when] |
| Firm List | [where and when published, two weeks before] |
| Daily Lists | [where and when published — draft and final] |
Ch4 §6(b) requires every centre to have a system for directing service of Certificates under CrimPR 3.12 and for their efficient review. Describing it here tells practitioners what is expected and when.
[How certificates are reviewed, and how a concern reaches the Case Progression Meeting.]
The detailed conduct of the meeting is addressed in Guidance Note No. 6; this Plan should contain what court users need in order to engage with it.
[Who convenes and chairs the meeting; who must be represented; whether defence representatives may attend; and what the meeting records.]
Whether witnesses are warned, or stood down, is a decision for the prosecutor. The defence remains responsible for arrangements concerning its witnesses.
[Any local review following the meeting, and the Daily List courtroom designation.]
The two models adopt different local timings. In each, the certificate deadline allows time for review before the Case Progression Meeting.
9. Representations about listing
Set out the route by which representations will be received and considered, including representations on the Firm List and Daily List (Ch4 §7(c), (g)).
Representations about listing may be made by any party or interested person, to [route] — a monitored team inbox, not an individual address. Representations intended for the Case Progression Meeting should be sent by [deadline]; representations in response to the Firm List or the Daily List should be sent, promptly, to the same address.
A useful representation identifies the case name and URN, the trial week, the issue, why it affects readiness or listing, what has already been done about it, and what is sought from the court. Receipt of a representation does not determine an application which requires a judicial decision.
10. Trial-date variations, trials not reached and delegated authority
A trial date, once fixed, is not varied without good reason. The unavailability of an advocate will not normally justify variation where the court considers that suitable alternative representation can reasonably be arranged without causing unfairness (Ch4 §9(c)).
The Resident Judge determines any circumstances in which the Listing Officer may agree a variation with the parties’ consent. The change must cause no undue delay, and the parties must consider the effect on defendants and witnesses (Ch4 §9(d)). State those circumstances here, or state that there are none.
Circumstances determined by the Resident Judge under Ch4 §9(d). [The circumstances, or a statement that there are none.] In any other case an application to vary a trial date is determined by a judge at a hearing (Ch4 §9(e)).
Trials not reached, and ineffective trials
Where a trial is not reached for lack of court time it is listed before a judge for further directions. It is not re-listed administratively. At that hearing the court reconsiders the Priority Tier and the listing arrangements; a Flexible Date trial not reached within its period is, so far as practicable, given a Fixed Date on re-listing.
The CrimPDL requires the court to monitor ineffective trials and their causes (Ch4 §6(c)). Where the centre has a standing arrangement for bringing ineffective trials back before a judge, record it here and identify it at section 3.
[Any standing arrangement for listing a case before a judge where the trial has become ineffective: when, before whom, and who attends.]
The limits of delegated authority
Listing staff carry out the day-to-day operation of listing under the direction of the Resident Judge. Delegation does not permit a decision which the CrimPDL requires to be made judicially. The following are judicial decisions: allocation and revision of the Priority Tier; any change between Fixed Date and Flexible Date; removal of a trial from the list; re-listing of a trial not reached; and any decision affecting judicial allocation or reservation.
The paragraphs setting out the national position above may be retained unamended. The Ch4 §9(d) circumstances are local to this centre.
[Any other listing decision delegated to listing staff, and its scope.]
11. Urgent and specialist standing arrangements
Custody time limits. [Any standing arrangement ensuring that an application relating to a custody time limit can be listed as a matter of urgency (Ch4 §13(d)), and the route for urgent judicial escalation.]
The operative edition of the Lady Chief Justice’s Live Links in Criminal Courts Guidance applies (Ch2 §8). It is available from a maintained national source, so it need not be reproduced or annexed here. What belongs in this section are standing local arrangements which affect how cases or capacity are organised.
Live links. [Any standing arrangement affecting the use of remote courtrooms, particular lists or prison video-link capacity.]
[Any other standing arrangement for urgent or specialist work at this centre — or a statement that there are none.]
12. Engagement with court users
Required by Ch4 §24(c) and §23. Contact routes need to be stable and monitored. A maintained team inbox is likely to outlast an individual’s address.
- Listing enquiries: [ ]
- Case progression: [ ]
- Representations about listing: as at section 9
[The court user group or equivalent forum, how often it meets, how to raise an item, and any standing arrangements with the CPS, the local Bar, solicitors, the Witness Care Unit or other agencies.]
These arrangements exist to improve the information available for listing; they are not a route for circumventing judicial decisions or formal applications.
13. Judicial responsibility and escalation
Listing is a judicial responsibility and function. HMCTS staff perform an essential operational role in support of the court and in accordance with judicial direction, and judicial oversight is maintained over all listing practices at this centre.
The paragraph above may be retained unamended. Complete the escalation and referral routes below.
[How a Fixed Date trial at risk, a serious readiness concern, a custody time limit issue and a recurring capacity problem are escalated, and to whom.]
[How a record of trials not reached and of ineffective trials and their causes is maintained and reviewed.]
[Any arrangements for early reservation of a case to a trial judge, and how a referral under Ch4 §1(h) is made.]
Referral arrangements
Every centre needs a route by which an urgent matter reaches a judge. Record who it is referred to, and what happens when that person is not sitting.
[How a matter requiring an urgent judicial decision is referred, and to whom — including the position when the Resident Judge is not sitting, and any arrangement for matters which may properly be determined without a hearing.]
14. Regional and cross-centre arrangements
Complete only where the centre participates in regional or cross-centre listing arrangements which materially affect local capacity or the expectations of court users (Ch4 §27). The approval requirements for transfers under Ch4 §26 apply of their own force and need not be restated here.
[The arrangement, the centres involved, and the work affected — or a statement that the centre participates in none.]
Transfers are arranged in accordance with Ch4 §26, which this Plan does not alter. Before a case is transferred the parties are informed and may make representations.
15. Review, amendment and version control
This Plan is reviewed [annually, in [month]], and whenever there is a material change to national guidance or to the arrangements it describes (Ch4 §24(b)). Each review considers whether any new local practice has developed which amounts to a local listing arrangement.
Material amendments are submitted to the Presiding Judges for approval before publication; minor administrative updates are not. A single current version is published, and superseded versions are archived.
Apart from the review cycle, the paragraphs in this section state the national position and may be retained unamended