On Monday, 22 June 2026, the Insolvency (England and Wales) (Amendment) Rules 2026 (Amendment Rules) came into effect, introducing a series of amendments to the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (IR 2016).

These changes are largely procedural in nature, modernising the IR 2016 to reflect current practice and providing long-awaited clarification on points that have generated uncertainty for those working in the insolvency space.

Key changes and practical implications

1. Removal of fax as a method of delivery

The Amendment Rules amend Rules 1.45,  3.20, 3.21 and 3.22 of the IR 2016 to remove fax as a permitted method of delivery to the courts and the Insolvency Service, including for out-of-hours administration appointments by qualifying floating charge holders. 

In practice, this is unlikely to have a significant impact, given that fax has long fallen out of common use.

2. Removal of the requirement to file in triplicate

Rule 3.26 IR 2016 previously required three copies of the notice of appointment of administrators (NOA) to be filed with the Court. In practice, however, notices were often filed electronically via CE-file, and three copies were not always submitted.

Rule 3.26(3) IR 2016 also required the Court to apply its seal to the copies, endorse them with the date and time of filing, and deliver two of the sealed copies to the appointer. Notwithstanding these requirements, the Court would typically provide only one copy of the sealed NOA. Given that appointment documents are now filed with the Court electronically rather than in person, practitioners have had the ability to download as many copies of the sealed NOA as required, and the obligation to return two sealed copies no longer served any practical purpose.

In Haw & Anor v QM Systems Ltd [2024] EWHC 1944 (Ch) (29 July 2024), the Court held that the failure to file three copies of the NOA was a purely procedural defect that did not invalidate the appointment, and that curing it caused no injustice to any party. However, the Court’s framing of its order as having 'cured' the defect led some practitioners to assume that a court order would be required in all such cases, even where the defect was minor, creating uncertainty and further expense.

The Amendment Rules have now resolved this: Rule 1.46 has been amended to reflect that only one copy is required where filing is effected via CE-file, eliminating any technical procedural defect.

3. Date and time removed

Rules 3.24 and 3.25 IR 2016 have been amended to remove the requirement to include the date and time of appointment in the notice of appointment. 

However, the time of appointment itself remains legally significant – for example, in establishing when the statutory moratorium takes effect – and practitioners should ensure it continues to be evidenced through CE-file timestamps or other contemporaneous records.

The practical implication of this change is that practitioners and advisers will need to update their precedents accordingly.

4. Creditors’ bankruptcy petitions

The debt threshold for determining whether a creditors’ bankruptcy petition in the London Insolvency District is presented to the County Court in Central London or the High Court has increased from £50,000 to £500,000, see Rule 10.11(1)(a) and (b). For petitions presented prior to 22 June 2026, the previous threshold of £50,000 continues to apply. 

In practice, this will result in a significantly greater proportion of petitions being directed to the County Court. Practitioners should note that procedural requirements, timescales, and judicial allocation differ between the two courts, with the High Court having typically offered faster turnaround times.

5. Officeholders’ remuneration 

Rule 18.30 IR 2016 has been amended to clarify that, unless the Court has fixed the basis of remuneration, any request for approval to draw fees in excess of an agreed estimate must be approved by the creditors' committee (where one exists) or, failing that, by the creditors or class of creditors that originally fixed the estimate.

In practice, this resolves a previous ambiguity regarding the appropriate approving body where a creditors' committee is formed after remuneration has been fixed. However, officeholders should ensure that applications are directed to the correct body, particularly where governance arrangements change during the insolvency.

Key actions

The following actions should be considered by those involved in insolvency matters following the changes that came into effect on 22 June 2026:

• Remove fax: From delivery processes and templates for communications with courts and the Insolvency Service.
• Update NOA filing checklists: Only one copy is required when filing via CE-file.
• Amend NOA precedents: To remove the date and time of appointment, but continue to evidence the time of appointment via CE-file timestamps or contemporaneous records.
• Reassess court allocation for creditors' bankruptcy petitions: The threshold for High Court presentation in the London Insolvency District has risen from £50,000 to £500,000.
• Send remuneration approval requests to the correct body: The creditors' committee where one exists, otherwise the creditors or class of creditors that originally fixed the estimate.

Summary

The Amendment Rules are a welcome development, reflecting an ongoing effort to ensure that the procedural framework governing insolvency keeps pace with how proceedings are conducted in practice.

If you have questions about how the Amendment Rules affect your current matter, please contact a member of our restructuring and insolvency team.