Although the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) are declared not to apply to insolvency proceedings, they are in fact applied as from 26 April 1996 by the Insolvency Rules (IR) 1986 as amended by SI 99/1022 so far as they are not inconsistent with the rules.There are some modifications and special provisions.

All insolvency proceedings are to be multi-track cases, which means it will be unnecessary to complete allocation questionnaires (IR r.7.51(2)).

Witness statements verified by statements of truth are permitted (insolvency rules (IR r.7.57) but affidavits are still required for certain specified circumstances including statements of affairs, submission of accounts, proof of debt and examinations under ss 236 and 366 of the Insolvency Act 1996.

Any affidavit evidence should comply with the CPR part 32 practice direction.Discovery under the old insolvency rules r.7.60 gives way to requests for information and disclosure.

Time limits are brought in line with CPR r.2.8.

The court is given power to extend or shorten time for compliance by the application of CPR r.3.1(2)(A).CostsThere are substantial amendments in relation to costs.

A new chapter 6 of part 7 of the insolvency rules is introduced to deal with costs and detailed assessment.

Generally, CPR parts 43 to 45, 47 and 48 apply to insolvency proceedings subject to modifications.

Proportionality as a concept together with reasonableness has been brought into the assessment of insolvency costs.

CPR r.44.5 - factors to be taken into account in deciding the amount of costs - has been specifically applied.

It remains to be seen whether this will have any impact on the levels of costs allowed to trustees in bankruptcy and liquidators.Practice directionA CPR practice direction has been issued which consolidates a number of earlier practice directions and practice notes.

This has the obvious advantage of providing a single source of information on procedural matters.

The practice direction is in four parts.

The first part is of general application; the second concerns companies; the third, personal insolvency; and the fourth, appeals.

In the second part, the importance of advertising a winding-up petition in The London Gazette is emphasised and solicitors are given a timely reminder that winding-up is a class remedy and is not to be used as a means of putting pressure on a company to pay a particular creditor's debt.

There is some relaxation of IR r.4.11 concerning the filing of a certificate of compliance, allowing a shortening of the five-day requirement.There are precise directions on how to deal with errors in petitions and on the distribution of business between judge and registrar/district judge.

Legal executives have the right of audience before the registrar/district judge on the hearing of petitions.

The drawing up of orders continues to be the court's responsibility except for orders made on applications by the official receiver or for which the treasury solicitor is responsible.

Schemes of arrangements were formerly excepted from the court's obligation to draw up orders but this is no longer the case.Statutory demands receive considerable attention.

There are some changes.

An application for an extension of time within which to apply to set aside a statutory demand may now be made to the registrar/district judge unless an injunction is also being sought to restrain the presentation of a petition at the same time.

Previously, an application had to be made to a judge.Paragraph 15 on bankruptcy petitions changes the times to be given in the written evidence of personal service.

Reference should be made to service being effected before or after 5pm - one hour later than before - and to any time on a Saturday or Sunday instead of after 12pm on a Sunday.

This mirrors the practice for service under CPR r.6.7(2) and (3).

Service may be proved by witness statement rather than affidavit provided it complies with CPR r.32.8 and PD 32 paragraphs 17.1 to 20.3.Under former practice note 2//92 it was forbidden to make an application by correspondence.

That express provision is not now included under paragraph 16 which allows orders to be made without attendance.

It would seem that an application by letter might suffice.The language in the new practice direction is similar to that in the directions and notes which are replaced with only occasional simplification of terminology.

For example, the normal criterion for setting aside a statutory demand is still 'a genuine triable issue' as against 'no real prospect of successfully defending' for ordering summary judgment.There may well be argument as to whether the different language was meant to reflect a different test.