For David Menzies, director of practice at ICAS, the consultation raises important questions about procedure, creditor engagement, remuneration, digital processes and the scope of future reform.

The consultation forms part of the UK government’s second post-implementation review of the Insolvency (England and Wales) Rules 2016 (the England and Wales Rules) and the first post-implementation review of the Insolvency (Scotland) (Company Voluntary Arrangements and Administration) Rules 2018.

Menzies describes its scope as “evolutionary rather than revolutionary”.

“It looks at how the Rules operate in practice, where they may create unnecessary cost or uncertainty, and whether they remain suitable for modern insolvency work,” he said. “The consultation doesn’t reopen the wider policy framework of the Insolvency Act 1986.”

The Scottish element of the review focuses on the Insolvency (Scotland) (Company Voluntary Arrangements and Administration) Rules 2018. Those Rules cover CVAs and administrations in Scotland, which fall within reserved policy areas for the UK government.

The consultation says that, where the findings are relevant to areas that are devolved or shared with Scotland, they should be shared with Scottish lawmakers. Menzies believes this will be important if the review identifies process issues that affect both UK and Scottish frameworks, or if changes to reserved rules have knock-on effects for Scottish insolvency processes. It also notes that recent changes to the England and Wales Rules will need to be taken into account in any future Scottish legislative amendments.

He added: “It’s important that insolvency processes remain closely aligned across the UK where possible. Scotland has its own legal system and court structure, so the rules cannot and should not be identical in every area. However, unnecessary differences between jurisdictions can add cost, uncertainty and complexity for firms, creditors and others working across the UK.

“Any future changes should keep processes closely aligned where this helps improve efficiency, makes things clearer for creditors and supports consistent outcomes.”