On 22 June 2026, amendments to the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (the Rules) came into force by way of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Amendment Rules 2026 (the Amended Rules).
The Amended Rules make several minor and technical amendments to the Rules which originally came into force in April 2017.
The intention, according to the explanatory notes, is to make the Rules clearer and more user-friendly as well as to reflect changing working practices.
Our Insolvency & Restructuring Lawyers explore the Amended Rules below.
The Amended Rules
In summary, the Amended Rules now provide for the following:
- Amending the definition of “Judge” to omit the obsolete term “Registrar”, which until 2018 was used to refer to Judges who heard insolvency matters.
- Remove references to the use of fax as a means of delivering documents to the Court and the Insolvency Service due to wider use of electronic means of communication, including email and the High Court’s electronic filing system. In practice, this is unlikely to have a significant impact as the use of fax machines is very rare now.
- Remove the requirement to deliver more than one copy of a document that is delivered electronically to the court or by the court to a party. For example, it was formerly the case that at least 3 copies were required to be filed for a Notice of Appointment of Administrators otherwise this could be classed as a procedural defect (though such a defect could be remedied). The requirement to provide at least 3 copies did not make sense due to the High Court’s electronic filing system and so this is a useful clarification to the Rules which reflects modern working practices.
- Clarifies the rules about the date and time where an administrator is appointed out of Court. Notwithstanding this, the date and time of an administrator being appointed remains significant in establishing when the statutory moratorium takes effect and so records still need to be kept to show when the administrator was appointed.
- That where a bankruptcy is based on an individual making an application to declare themselves bankrupt, the trustee’s notice on completion of the bankruptcy should be delivered to the Official Receiver (rather than filed at Court).
- That where a creditor’s bankruptcy petition is allocated to the London Insolvency District, the financial threshold for presenting the petition in the High Court (rather than the County Court) is increased from £50,000 to £500,000. Please note, this does not apply to petitions presented prior to 22 June 2026: the £50,000 threshold will continue to apply.
- Require an insolvency officeholder to make a request to any existing creditor committee for approval to exceed any fees estimate (except where the Court fixed the basis). If there is no creditor committee, the request should be made to the creditors or class of creditors which fixed the basis. Previously, where the creditors or a class of creditors fixed the basis, the requirement was to make a request for approval to those creditors even where a committee was subsequently formed.
Contact our Insolvency and Restructuring Team
If you have any queries relating to the Amended Rules, please contact our specialist Insolvency and Restructuring team today.
0161 941 4000
Latest Myerson Insolvency & Restructuring News
Myerson Solicitors Strengthens Chambers UK Rankings with Six New Recognitions in 2027 Guide
Leading independent law firm Myerson Solicitors has secured six new rankings in the Chambers and Partners UK Guide 2027, further strengthening its reputation for legal excellence and reflecting a sustained period of growth and success for the firm.
Read News
17
Insolvency Sale Transactions Under the Microscope
Practical insight into connected-party sales, pre-pack administrations, deal financing and defensible office-holder decisions. Insolvency sale transactions can present complex legal, commercial and practical challenges, particularly where connected parties, valuation issues or alternative financing arrangements are involved. Join Myerson...
View Event
Directors’ Duties: What Does Saxon Woods v Costa Mean for Company Directors?
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Saxon Woods Investments Limited and others v Costa provides important guidance on the limits of directors' duties under section 172 of the Companies Act 2006. In summary, the Supreme Court’s judgment confirms that a director cannot secretly pursue their own strategy contrary to the strategy agreed by the...
Read Blog
Can a Court Save a Retailer? The TG Jones Judgment Shows the Limits of Restructuring
On 1 July 2026, the High Court approved TG Jones' restructuring plan - but the judge (Mr Justice Hildyard) openly questioned whether the turnaround would succeed. Our Insolvency and Restructuring team explore what the Court’s decision in this case tells us about the current restructuring regime in England and Wales.
Read Blog
Can a Foreign Judgment Be Used for a Bankruptcy Petition in England and Wales?
Can a creditor petition for the bankruptcy of an individual in England and Wales on the basis of a foreign judgment that has never been recognised by the English courts? The Supreme Court's recent decision in Valeriy Ernestovich Drelle v Servis-Terminal LLC (In Liquidation in the Russian Federation) provides a definitive answer and has...
Read Blog