Council Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 of 27 July 1994 on Community plant variety rights
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
Article 100 Consequences of a change in holdership of a Community plant variety right
1. In the event of a complete change in the holdership of a Community plant variety right in consequence of a final judgment delivered pursuant to Articles 101 or 102 for the purposes of claiming entitlement under Article 98 (1), any exploitation or other rights shall lapse with the entry of the person entitled in the Register of Community Plant Variety Rights. 2. Where the holder or a person enjoying the right of exploitation has effected one of the acts set out in Article 13 (2) or has made effective and genuine arrangements to do so prior to the commencement of the proceedings pursuant to Articles 101 or 102, he may continue or perform such acts provided he requests a non-exclusive exploitation right from the new holder entered in the Register of Community Plant Variety Rights. Such requests must be made within the time limit laid down in the implementing rules. The exploitation right may be granted by the Office in the absence of an agreement between the parties. Article 29 (3) to (7) shall apply mutatis mutandis. 3. Paragraph 2 shall not apply where the holder or persons enjoying the right of exploitation acted in bad faith when they effected the acts or began to make the arrangements.
Article 100 Consequences of a change in holdership of a Community plant variety right
1. In the event of a complete change in the holdership of a Community plant variety right in consequence of a final judgment delivered pursuant to Articles 101 or 102 for the purposes of claiming entitlement under Article 98 (1), any exploitation or other rights shall lapse with the entry of the person entitled in the Register of Community Plant Variety Rights. 2. Where the holder or a person enjoying the right of exploitation has effected one of the acts set out in Article 13 (2) or has made effective and genuine arrangements to do so prior to the commencement of the proceedings pursuant to Articles 101 or 102, he may continue or perform such acts provided he requests a non-exclusive exploitation right from the new holder entered in the Register of Community Plant Variety Rights. Such requests must be made within the time limit laid down in the implementing rules. The exploitation right may be granted by the Office in the absence of an agreement between the parties. Article 29 (3) to (7) shall apply mutatis mutandis. 3. Paragraph 2 shall not apply where the holder or persons enjoying the right of exploitation acted in bad faith when they effected the acts or began to make the arrangements.
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.