This week's edition of Restructuring & Insolvency weekly highlights includes: an examination of an application by bankrupts’ daughters to set aside or vary, under CPR 40.9, a declaration made in earlier proceedings (to which the daughters were not party) that the trustees in bankruptcy were legally and beneficially entitled to the family property and entitled to sell it (Bhattacharya v Armstrong), a discussion of a judgment that confirmed the now-settled robust approach to Bounce Back Loan misconduct cases (The Secretary of State for Business and Trade v Pal), an analysis considering the wording proposed by UNCITRAL in the Working Documents publicly available ahead of the 68th session (13-17 April 2026, New York) of UNCITRAL’s Working Group V: Insolvency Law, plus a round-up of other news and cases for restructuring and insolvency professionals.