The Court Funds (Amendment) Rules 2026 are a corrective statutory instrument rather than a new policy scheme. Made on 3 June 2026, laid before Parliament on 5 June and due to come into force on 29 June 2026, the Rules address a defect in S.I. 2025/1275 and are being issued free of charge to all known recipients of that earlier instrument. The Rules were made by the Lord Chancellor, with the concurrence of the Treasury, under section 38 of the Administration of Justice Act 1982. They extend to England and Wales and apply across the Senior Courts, the County Court and the Family Court. According to the Explanatory Note, the purpose is to repair drafting in the Court Funds Rules 2011, which govern how the Accountant General administers money held by the court.
One amendment concerns rule 11 on interest-bearing accounts. The 2011 Rules require the Accountant General to maintain two such accounts, described as the basic account and the special account. The 2026 instrument inserts a new paragraph making clear that money must not be invested in the special account unless it is money to which a child or a person who lacks capacity is entitled. That is a narrow textual change, but it closes an important point of uncertainty. In plain terms, it confirms that the special account is reserved for funds belonging to protected parties. For court administration, that gives staff a clearer rule when allocating money paid into court. For litigants and professional representatives, it confirms that the special account is not a general option for court funds outside those categories.
The more substantial correction is to rule 27, which deals with payment out of money paid into court under CPR rule 37.3 where the court's permission is not required. The 2026 Rules substitute the whole of rule 27 after the 2025 amendment introduced defective drafting. The revised wording states more clearly what the Accountant General must receive before money can be released. Where a defendant has deposited money under a court order or in support of a defence of tender before claim, and a CPR Part 36 offer is later accepted, the claimant must make the request for payment and the defendant must confirm that all or part of the fund in court may be used to satisfy the offer. Where rule 22A(1) applies, those steps can be completed electronically rather than on paper.
The Explanatory Note says the substitution is also designed to remove ambiguity created by the 2025 text as to whether the remainder of rule 27 had been omitted altogether. To deal with that point, the rest of the rule has been reproduced and renumbered for clarity, while otherwise remaining the same as it was before the 2025 amendment. That restored text matters because it preserves the existing rules on interest and on cases involving more than one defendant. Any accrued interest left in court after a payment under paragraph (2) or rule 28(2) must be paid to the defendant. The rule also continues to prevent payment where defendants are sued jointly and not all of them have paid money into court, unless the claimant has discontinued against the non-paying defendants and the Accountant General has received the notice of discontinuance and each defendant's written consent.
For court staff and the Accountant General, the correction should reduce the scope for avoidable delay at the point when settlement money is to be released. The amended rule now states more directly what material is required from each side, which is important in a system that depends on exact documentary compliance before funds move out of court. For litigants and advisers, the practical effect is equally clear. A claimant cannot expect payment on the basis of acceptance alone if the rule requires corresponding confirmation from the defendant. In multi-defendant litigation, the formal steps on discontinuance still have to be completed before money can be paid out. The amendment does not redesign the process, but it removes doubt created by defective drafting.
Taken as a whole, the instrument is a housekeeping measure with real operational value. Technical defects in procedural rules can create uncertainty out of proportion to the size of the drafting error, especially where the release of court-held money depends on precise wording. The Ministry of Justice has therefore used this instrument to restore clarity and continuity in the 2011 framework. No full impact assessment has been produced because the Government does not expect significant effects on the private, voluntary or public sectors. Even so, the correction is still important for day-to-day court administration. From 29 June 2026, the rules should provide a clearer basis for handling special accounts and for making payments out of court funds in England and Wales.