Planning (Hazardous Substances) Act 1990
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
22 Validity of decisions as to applications.
(1) If any person is aggrieved by any decision of the Secretary of State under section 20 or 21 and wishes to question the validity of that decision on the grounds— (a) that it is not within the powers of this Act; or (b) that any of the relevant requirements have not been complied with in relation to that decision, he may ... make an application to the High Court under this section. (2) Without prejudice to subsection (1), if the hazardous substances authority who made the decision on the application to which the proceedings relate or, as the case may be, referred the application wish to question the validity of any such decision as is mentioned in that subsection on any of the grounds there mentioned, the authority may ... make an application to the High Court under this section. (2A) An application under this section may not be made without the leave of the High Court. (2B) An application for leave for the purposes of subsection (2A) must be made before the end of the period of six weeks beginning with the day after the date on which the decision to which the application relates is taken. (2C) When considering whether to grant leave for the purposes of subsection (2A), the High Court may by interim order suspend the operation of the decision the validity of which the person or authority concerned wishes to question, until the final determination of— (a) the question of whether leave should be granted, or (b) where leave is granted, the proceedings on any application under this section made with such leave. (3) On any application under this section (other than an application for leave) the High Court— (a) may by interim order suspend the operation of the decision the validity of which is questioned by the application until the final determination of the proceedings; (b) if satisfied that the decision in question is not within the powers of this Act, or that the interests of the applicant have been substantially prejudiced by a failure to comply with any of the relevant requirements in relation to it, may quash that decision. (4) In this section “the relevant requirements”, in relation to any decision, means any requirements of this Act or the principal Actor of the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992, or of any order, regulations or rules made under this Act or under either of those Acts which are applicable to that decision. (5) Except as provided by this section, the validity of any such decision as is mentioned in subsection (1) shall not be questioned in any legal proceedings whatsoever. (6) Nothing in subsection (5) shall affect the exercise of any jurisdiction of any court in respect of any refusal or failure on the part of the Secretary of State to take any such decision as is there mentioned.
22 Validity of decisions as to applications.
(1) If any person is aggrieved by any decision of the Secretary of State under section 20 or 21 and wishes to question the validity of that decision on the grounds— (a) that it is not within the powers of this Act; or (b) that any of the relevant requirements have not been complied with in relation to that decision, he may ... make an application to the High Court under this section. (2) Without prejudice to subsection (1), if the hazardous substances authority who made the decision on the application to which the proceedings relate or, as the case may be, referred the application wish to question the validity of any such decision as is mentioned in that subsection on any of the grounds there mentioned, the authority may ... make an application to the High Court under this section. (2A) An application under this section may not be made without the leave of the High Court. (2B) An application for leave for the purposes of subsection (2A) must be made before the end of the period of six weeks beginning with the day after the date on which the decision to which the application relates is taken. (2C) When considering whether to grant leave for the purposes of subsection (2A), the High Court may by interim order suspend the operation of the decision the validity of which the person or authority concerned wishes to question, until the final determination of— (a) the question of whether leave should be granted, or (b) where leave is granted, the proceedings on any application under this section made with such leave. (3) On any application under this section (other than an application for leave) the High Court— (a) may by interim order suspend the operation of the decision the validity of which is questioned by the application until the final determination of the proceedings; (b) if satisfied that the decision in question is not within the powers of this Act, or that the interests of the applicant have been substantially prejudiced by a failure to comply with any of the relevant requirements in relation to it, may quash that decision. (4) In this section “the relevant requirements”, in relation to any decision, means any requirements of this Act or the principal Actor of the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992, or of any order, regulations or rules made under this Act or under either of those Acts which are applicable to that decision. (5) Except as provided by this section, the validity of any such decision as is mentioned in subsection (1) shall not be questioned in any legal proceedings whatsoever. (6) Nothing in subsection (5) shall affect the exercise of any jurisdiction of any court in respect of any refusal or failure on the part of the Secretary of State to take any such decision as is there mentioned.
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.