Energy Act 2016
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
26 Appeals against decisions of the OGA: disputes
(1) This section applies to any decision of the OGA to which effect is given by one of the actions set out in an entry in column 1 of the table below. (2) A person affected by any such decision may appeal against it to the Tribunal— (a) on the grounds that the decision was not within the powers of the OGA, or (b) on the grounds set out in the corresponding entry in column 2 of the table. (1) Action by the OGA | (2) Grounds for appeal The setting of a timetable under section 21(5)(a). | The timetable is unreasonable. The giving of directions under section 21(5)(b). | A direction, or a number of directions taken together, are unreasonable. The giving of directions under section 23(3)(b). | A direction, or a number of directions taken together, are unreasonable. The imposition of a requirement to provide information under section 24(1). | Either— the information requested is not relevant to the dispute in question, or the period specified under section 24(2) is unreasonable. The imposition of a requirement under section 25(1) or (2) in relation to attendance at a meeting. | Either— the requirement to attend the meeting is unreasonable, reasonable notice of the meeting was not given, or the requirement as to the knowledge and expertise of the person attending the meeting is unreasonable. (3) On an appeal under this section the Tribunal may— (a) affirm, vary or quash the decision under appeal, (b) remit the decision under appeal to the OGA for reconsideration with such directions (if any) as the Tribunal considers appropriate, or (c) substitute its own decision for the decision under appeal.
26 Appeals against decisions of the OGA: disputes
(1) This section applies to any decision of the OGA to which effect is given by one of the actions set out in an entry in column 1 of the table below. (2) A person affected by any such decision may appeal against it to the Tribunal— (a) on the grounds that the decision was not within the powers of the OGA, or (b) on the grounds set out in the corresponding entry in column 2 of the table. (1) Action by the OGA | (2) Grounds for appeal The setting of a timetable under section 21(5)(a). | The timetable is unreasonable. The giving of directions under section 21(5)(b). | A direction, or a number of directions taken together, are unreasonable. The giving of directions under section 23(3)(b). | A direction, or a number of directions taken together, are unreasonable. The imposition of a requirement to provide information under section 24(1). | Either— the information requested is not relevant to the dispute in question, or the period specified under section 24(2) is unreasonable. The imposition of a requirement under section 25(1) or (2) in relation to attendance at a meeting. | Either— the requirement to attend the meeting is unreasonable, reasonable notice of the meeting was not given, or the requirement as to the knowledge and expertise of the person attending the meeting is unreasonable. (3) On an appeal under this section the Tribunal may— (a) affirm, vary or quash the decision under appeal, (b) remit the decision under appeal to the OGA for reconsideration with such directions (if any) as the Tribunal considers appropriate, or (c) substitute its own decision for the decision under appeal.
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.