The Committee of University Chairs (CUC) published a revised Higher Education Code of Governance in June 2026. The revised Code introduces significant structural, cultural and regulatory changes for university boards in England, with direct implications for compliance with the Office for Students (OfS) regulatory framework.

This hub brings together expert legal analysis from Browne Jacobson across all key areas of the revised Code, from board composition and academic governance through to charity law obligations and implementation steps.

What has changed?

The CUC published the revised Higher Education Code of Governance on 17 June 2026, following an extensive sector-wide consultation and a near-final draft for public comment in April 2026. The revised Code departs fundamentally from the 2020 Code it replaces. Where the 2020 Code operated on a broadly aspirational, homogeneous ‘comply or explain’ basis, the revised Code introduces a formal two-tier framework of ‘must’ and ‘should’ provisions, operating on an ‘apply or explain’ basis.

‘Must’ provisions set minimum expectations required to claim compliance; ‘should’ provisions require boards to exercise judgement and, where they take a different approach, to publish a clear, specific and informative rationale. The CUC has been explicit that incremental amendment of the 2020 Code would not have been sufficient, and that the revised Code represents, in many areas, a significant shift in governance expectations for the sector.

Why is this significant for higher education institutions? 

The revised Code carries direct regulatory significance. The Office for Students (OfS) has formally welcomed its publication, and in a letter to university chairs dated 24 June 2026, OfS Chair Professor Edward Peck signalled that the OfS intends to consult formally on its governance conditions of registration in early 2027, building directly on the revised Code's framework. 

Governing bodies should therefore treat implementation not as a routine housekeeping exercise, but as active preparation for a regulatory consultation that will shape the OfS conditions for years to come. Our analysis of the OfS response and what it means for the regulatory outlook is set out in full in the first article in this series.

What this guide covers

• The OfS response and regulatory outlook: How the Office for Students has responded to the revised Code and what the changed regulatory landscape means for your institution's ongoing compliance obligations.
• New structural architecture: An analysis of the revised structural framework introduced by the new Code, including changes to the distribution of governance responsibilities.
• Culture and behaviours: What the Code's new expectations around board culture, diversity of thought and behavioural standards mean in practice for governors and senior leaders.
• Strategy, sustainability, risk and assurance: How the Code reshapes board responsibilities for strategic oversight, financial sustainability, risk management and assurance frameworks.
• Board composition: New requirements around board size, skills, independence and diversity, and how institutions should approach composition reviews.
• Academic governance and Board effectiveness: The relationship between the board and academic governance structures, and updated expectations around board effectiveness reviews.
• Formalised individual role responsibilities: What the formalisation of individual role responsibilities means for Chairs, Vice-Chancellors, Senior Independent Governors and other key office-holders.
• Student and staff Board members: Guidance on the Code's provisions for student and staff governors, including engagement, voting rights and confidentiality obligations.
• Charity and OfS governance: The intersection of charity law duties and OfS governance requirements, and how boards should manage dual regulatory obligations.
• Steps to implementation: A practical, step-by-step guide to implementing the revised Code, including a series of FAQs to address the most common questions from institutions.

This article series is for general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Institutions should take specific legal advice on their individual circumstances. Our higher education team would be pleased to assist with gap analysis, crosswalk mapping, Code of Conduct development, remuneration legal reviews or any other aspect of revised Code implementation.