The Insolvency (England and Wales) (Amendment) Rules 2026

Published: Thu 28th May 26

The Armed Forces Act 2011 makes various amendments to the existing legislation governing the UK Armed Forces, focusing primarily on reforming and modernizing the Service Justice System, establishing new procedures for dealing with service complaints, and making necessary consequential changes to service law to improve discipline, fairness, and administrative efficiency for members of the Army, Royal Navy, and Royal Air Force.

Arguments For

Enhancing the efficiency and fairness of the Service Justice System by allowing certain disciplinary proceedings to be carried out more swiftly, aligning justice delivery with operational requirements.
Modernizing legal frameworks for the armed forces, ensuring that Service law remains fit for purpose in contemporary military and international contexts.
Providing explicit mechanisms for the investigation and redress of complaints made by Service personnel, thereby upholding service welfare and addressing grievances systematically.
Extending the applicability and scope of certain service discipline regulations to ensure comprehensive legal coverage for all members of the armed forces, regardless of location.

Arguments Against

Concerns that changes to the Service Justice System, particularly concerning summary jurisdiction, could risk undermining due process or the established rights of Service personnel compared to civilian justice standards.
Potential for increased administrative burden on commanding officers or Service courts due to new reporting or review requirements introduced by the Act.
Questions regarding the impact of new judicial appointments or procedural changes on the independence and perceived fairness of military tribunals and proceedings.
Practical difficulties in immediately implementing all provisions across globally deployed armed forces, requiring significant training and adaptation across different theaters of operation.

PART 1 SERVICE DISCIPLINE

Inquiry into conduct of person subject to service law

(1) Section 116 of the Armed Forces Act 1996 (inquiry into conduct of person subject to service law) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (1), for “the proper authority may” there is substituted “the proper authority shall”.

(3) For subsection (2) substitute—

“(2) The inquiry is to be conducted in the manner directed by the proper authority.

(3) The proper authority may direct that the inquiry is to consist of—

(a) a single investigating officer;

(b) two or more investigating officers;

(d) a board of more than one officer.

(4) The proper authority shall ensure that the person appointed to conduct the inquiry is a person who has sufficient experience and knowledge to do so effectively.”

This part amends Section 116 of the Armed Forces Act 1996 concerning inquiries into the conduct of any person subject to service law.

The proper authority must now conduct an inquiry, rather than having the option to do so.

The authority is given flexible direction on how the inquiry is structured, allowing it to be conducted by a single investigating officer, multiple officers, or a board structure.

The Act mandates that whoever is appointed to conduct this inquiry must possess suitable experience and knowledge to execute the function effectively.

Trial by court-martial or summary trial: service offences committed on active service

(1) Section 135 of the Armed Forces Act 1996 (service offences committed on active service) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (1), after “in relation to the offence” insert “and the powers of a commanding officer under section 137(3) in relation to the offence are exercisable subject to subsection (1A).”.

(3) After subsection (1) insert—

“(1A) The powers of a commanding officer under section 137(3) are exercisable in relation to an offence committed on active service by a person subject to service law only if the commanding officer is of a rank not lower than Major or corresponding rank.”

This section modifies the rules regarding service offences committed while personnel are on active service, specifically pertaining to trials by court-martial or summary trial.

It introduces a new constraint on the powers of a commanding officer when dealing with such offences under Section 137(3).

Specifically, the power of a commanding officer to deal summarily with an offence committed on active service can only be exercised if the commanding officer holds a rank equivalent to or higher than Major.

Powers of commanding officer in relation to summary trial: qualifying offences

(1) Section 137 of the Armed Forces Act 1996 (powers of commanding officer in relation to summary trial) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (3)—

(a) in paragraph (a), for “in service prison or service custody” substitute “in a service prison, a service custody suite or a designated British prison”; and

(b) in paragraph (b), for “in service prison or service custody” substitute “in a service prison, a service custody suite or a designated British prison”.

(3) The reference in subsection (3) to a designated British prison is a reference to a prison in the United Kingdom which is designated under section 160A for the purposes of this section.

Subsection (3) of Section 137, which outlines the powers available to a commanding officer during a summary trial, is updated to expand where a service person can be detained.

The terms "service prison or service custody" are replaced with the more specific phrase "a service prison, a service custody suite or a designated British prison."

This introduces the concept of a 'designated British prison,' which is defined as a prison operating within the United Kingdom that has been officially designated under a new provision, Section 160A, for the purpose of holding personnel being dealt with under summary trial powers.

Arrest and custody pending trial or investigation: power to take person to designated British prison

(1) Section 154 of the Armed Forces Act 1996 (arrest and custody pending trial or investigation) is amended as follows.

(2) After subsection (3) insert—

“(3A) If the person in custody is subject to service law, the person may be taken to a designated British prison and held there in custody pending the investigation or trial or until released from custody pursuant to any provision of this Act or of directions given under powers conferred by this Act.”

(3) The reference in subsection (3A) to a designated British prison has the same meaning as in section 137(3A) as inserted by section 3(3).

Section 154, concerning the detention of individuals awaiting investigation or trial, is modified to allow for detention in a 'designated British prison.' This applies if the person in custody is subject to service law.

The person may be held in this designated UK prison until the investigation concludes, the trial finishes, or they are legally released from custody under the authority of the Armed Forces Act.

This definition of 'designated British prison' references the term established in the preceding Section 3.

Service prisons and custody suites: designation of British prisons as service custody suites

(1) Section 160 of the Armed Forces Act 1996 (service prisons and custody suites) is amended as follows.

(2) After subsection (1) insert—

“(1A) The Secretary of State may by order designate any prison in the United Kingdom as a service custody suite for the purposes of this Act.”

(3) In subsection (2), after “service custody suite” insert “or designated British prison”.

This amendment allows the Secretary of State to officially designate any prison located within the United Kingdom to function as a 'service custody suite' for the purposes of the Act.

Furthermore, existing subsection (2) is updated to explicitly include 'designated British prison' alongside 'service custody suite' when describing places where service personnel can be held.

Service prisons and custody suites: designation of British prisons for temporary detention

After section 160 of the Armed Forces Act 1996 insert—

“Designation of British prisons for temporary detention

160A. (1) The Secretary of State may by order designate any prison in the United Kingdom as a designated British prison for the purposes of—

(a) section 137(3);

(b) section 154(3A).

(2) An order under subsection (1) may designate a prison for the purposes mentioned in both paragraphs (a) and (b) of that subsection or for the purposes mentioned in only one of those paragraphs.”

This inserts a new section, 160A, authorizing the Secretary of State to designate a UK prison as a 'designated British prison.' This designation is specifically for the purposes of holding individuals subject to summary trial powers (Section 137(3)) or those being detained pending trial or investigation (Section 154(3A)).

Crucially, the authorization allows the Secretary of State to designate a prison for one purpose, the other purpose, or both, providing flexibility in utilizing these designated facilities.

PART 2 SERVICE COMPLAINTS

Making a complaint to the Service Complaints Ombudsman

(1) Section 340A of the Armed Forces Act 2006 (complaints to the Service Complaints Ombudsman) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (1), for “if the person has exhausted all opportunities for redress under service complaints procedures” substitute “if the person has exhausted all opportunities for redress under service complaints procedures or if the Ombudsman considers it appropriate to consider the complaint without the person having exhausted those procedures”.

(3) After subsection (1) insert—

“(1A) The Ombudsman may investigate a complaint under this section without the person having exhausted all opportunities for redress under service complaints procedures if the Ombudsman considers that it is appropriate to do so having regard to—

(a) the nature of the complaint;

(b) the interests of the person, the Service concerned and the public interest; and

This section amends the process for making a complaint directly to the Service Complaints Ombudsman (SCO), revising the condition under which the SCO can intervene.

Previously, the individual had to exhaust all internal redress procedures first.

The Act now allows the SCO to investigate a complaint even if internal procedures are not fully exhausted, provided the Ombudsman deems it appropriate.

The decision to intervene early must consider factors like the complaint's nature, the interests of the service person, the Service itself, and the wider public interest.

Time limit for making a complaint to the Service Complaints Ombudsman

(1) Section 340B of the Armed Forces Act 2006 (time limit for making a complaint to the Service Complaints Ombudsman) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2)—

(a) in paragraph (a), for “if the person has exhausted all opportunities for redress under service complaints procedures” substitute “if the person has exhausted all opportunities for redress under service complaints procedures or if the Ombudsman considers that the time limit should not apply because of exceptional circumstances”; and

(b) in paragraph (b), for “so exhausted” substitute “so exhausted or (as the case may be) the Ombudsman so decided”.

(3) After subsection (2) insert—

“(2A) The Ombudsman may decide that the time limit under subsection (1) should not apply if the Ombudsman considers that the time limit should not apply because of exceptional circumstances.”

This amends the time constraints for submitting a complaint to the SCO, found in Section 340B of the 2006 Act.

The standard requirement is that complaints must be lodged within a specific time limit unless the person has exhausted internal redress options.

Now, the SCO has the discretion to set aside this time limit if they determine that 'exceptional circumstances' justify lifting the restriction.

This change mirrors the new intervention power introduced in Section 7, allowing procedural flexibility when warranted.

Reference of complaints to the Service Complaints Ombudsman

(1) Section 340C of the Armed Forces Act 2006 (reference of complaints to the Service Complaints Ombudsman) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2), for “if the person has exhausted all opportunities for redress under service complaints procedures” substitute “if the person has exhausted all opportunities for redress under service complaints procedures or if the Ombudsman considers it appropriate to consider the complaint without the person having exhausted those procedures”.

(3) After subsection (2) insert—

“(2A) The Ombudsman may cause a complaint to be investigated under this section without the person having exhausted all opportunities for redress under service complaints procedures if the Ombudsman considers that it is appropriate to do so having regard to—

(a) the nature of the complaint;

(b) the interests of the person, the Service concerned and the public interest; and

Section 340C deals with the process where a complaint is officially referred to the SCO, often by a senior officer.

Similar to Section 7, this section removes the strict requirement that internal redress procedures must be fully completed before the SCO can step in and initiate an investigation.

If the SCO determines that immediate consideration is appropriate based on the complaint's seriousness, the interests of the individual, the Service, and public interest, they can proceed with examining the referral without waiting for the internal process to conclude.

PART 3 JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS

Judge Advocate General: removal of requirement for Secretary of State to approve appointment

(1) Section 166 of the Armed Forces Act 2006 (Judge Advocate General) is amended as follows.

(2) Subsection (2) (which provides for the appointment of the Judge Advocate General to be approved by the Secretary of State) is omitted.

(3) In subsection (3), for “The holding of office by the Judge Advocate General is an office under the Crown for the purposes of the Superannuation Act 1972” substitute “The holding of office by the Judge Advocate General is an office under the Crown for the purposes of the Superannuation Act 1965”.

This section reforms the appointment process for the Judge Advocate General (JAG), the principal legal adviser to the armed forces.

It removes the requirement that the Secretary of State must formally approve the JAG's appointment, suggesting a move towards greater judicial independence in this senior role.

Additionally, the basis for superannuation (pensions) for the JAG's office is updated from the Superannuation Act 1972 to the Superannuation Act 1965.

Courts Martial Appeal Court: constitution for review of decisions of Courts Martial

(1) Section 153 of the Courts Martial Appeal Court Act 1968 (constitution for review of decisions of Courts Martial) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (1), omit “shall consist of three judges of the Court” and insert “shall consist of such number of judges of the Court as the Lord Chief Justice may determine”.

(3) After subsection (1) insert—

“(1A) The Lord Chief Justice may direct that a review by the Court under this section is to be heard by five judges of the Court if the Lord Chief Justice thinks that the case requires consideration by a full court.”

This amendment concerns the composition of the Courts Martial Appeal Court when it reviews decisions made by Courts Martial.

Previously, reviews were mandated to consist of three judges.

The Lord Chief Justice is now given the authority to determine the required number of judges for a review panel.

Furthermore, the Lord Chief Justice can direct that a specific case be heard by five judges if the complexity necessitates consideration by a 'full court'.

View Source

Finance Justice

The Anti-avoidance Information Notices (Resolution of Disputes as to Privilege) Regulations 2026

Fri 29th May 26

The regulations defined the procedure for resolving disputes about whether information requested under an anti-avoidance notice in the Finance Act 2026 is privileged, including referral to the tribunal.

Justice Local Government

Correction Slip

Wed 27th May 26

A formal correction was issued in May 2026 for the 2026 Regulations concerning fees for registration of births, deaths, marriages, and civil partnerships in England and Wales, adding a regulation note and correcting a row reference in the Schedule.

Infrastructure Justice Local Government Transport

The A46 Coventry Junctions (Walsgrave) Development Consent (Correction) Order 2026

Wed 27th May 26

The legal instrument corrected specified technical errors and omissions within the associated A46 Coventry Junctions (Walsgrave) Development Consent Order 2026 following a formal request.

Education Justice Local Government

The Education (Educational Provision for Improving Behaviour) (Application to Academies and Pupil Referral Units and Minor Amendments) Regulations 2026

Tue 26th May 26

The regulations applied existing behaviour improvement powers under Section 29A of the 2002 Act and related 2010 Regulations to Academies and Pupil Referral Units in England, mandated specific review timings for pre-existing pupil requirements, and corrected references to Educational, Health and Care (EHC) plans in subordinate legislation.