������Ƶ

A Tolling Agreement pauses the time limit for filing a legal claim, giving parties more time to negotiate without rushing to court. In New Zealand, these agreements are commonly used when the standard limitation period under the Limitation Act 2010 is running short, but both sides want to explore settlement options first.

They're particularly valuable in complex commercial disputes, construction claims, and professional negligence cases where gathering evidence takes time. The agreement essentially stops the legal clock, protecting the right to sue while creating space for mediation or direct negotiations. Both parties must clearly specify the claims covered and the new deadline in writing to make it legally binding under NZ law.

Consider a Tolling Agreement when your legal claim's deadline is approaching but you need more time to negotiate or investigate. This often happens in construction disputes, professional negligence cases, or commercial conflicts where gathering evidence and expert opinions takes longer than the Limitation Act 2010 allows.

The agreement becomes especially valuable when both parties see potential for settlement but need breathing room to work things out. It's also useful in multi-party disputes where some defendants are willing to negotiate while others aren't, or when technical investigations are ongoing. Getting this agreement in place early helps avoid rushed court filings and preserves relationships during negotiations.

• Open-ended Tolling Agreements: Pause the limitation period indefinitely until either party gives notice to end it
• Fixed-term Agreements: Set a specific deadline extension, common in construction disputes where project completion timelines are known
• Conditional Agreements: Link the tolling period to specific events, like completing expert investigations or mediation attempts
• Partial Claim Agreements: Cover only certain aspects of a dispute while letting limitation periods run on others
• Staged Agreements: Gradually extend time limits based on negotiation progress, popular in complex commercial disputes

• Potential Claimants: Parties considering legal action but wanting to explore settlement first, including property owners, businesses, and professional service clients
• Defendants: Parties facing possible claims who prefer negotiation over immediate litigation, such as builders, advisors, or companies
• Legal Counsel: Lawyers who draft and negotiate the Tolling Agreement terms, ensuring their clients' interests are protected
• Insurance Companies: Often involved when claims relate to professional indemnity or construction insurance
• Mediators: Third-party facilitators who help parties reach settlement during the tolling period

• Identify Claims: List all potential legal claims, their current limitation dates, and relevant sections of the Limitation Act 2010
• Party Details: Gather full legal names, addresses, and authority of signatories for all involved parties
• Timeline Planning: Determine the exact extension period needed and any specific milestones or conditions
• Scope Definition: Clearly outline which claims are covered and any excluded matters
• Supporting Documents: Collect relevant correspondence, contracts, and evidence that proves the underlying claims
• Agreement Terms: Use our platform to generate a legally sound document that includes all required elements and local compliance requirements

• Party Identification: Full legal names, addresses, and roles of all parties involved in the tolling arrangement
• Claims Description: Specific details of the claims being tolled, including relevant dates and causes of action
• Time Extension: Clear statement of the new limitation period or extension duration
• Preservation Clause: Confirmation that all legal rights and defences remain intact
• Termination Terms: Conditions and process for ending the agreement
• Governing Law: Explicit reference to New Zealand law and the Limitation Act 2010
• Execution Block: Proper signature sections for all parties with witness requirements

A Tolling Agreement is often confused with an Arbitration Agreement, but they serve distinctly different purposes in dispute resolution. While both help parties manage disputes outside court, their timing and effects differ significantly.

• Purpose: Tolling Agreements pause the limitation period to allow negotiation time, while Arbitration Agreements commit parties to resolve disputes through arbitration instead of court
• Timing of Use: Tolling Agreements are used when a claim already exists but parties need more time, whereas Arbitration Agreements are typically signed before any dispute arises
• Legal Effect: Tolling preserves the right to sue later, while arbitration permanently changes the forum for dispute resolution
• Flexibility: Tolling Agreements maintain all legal options, but Arbitration Agreements generally lock parties into the arbitration process