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
As published
Article 85 Apportionment of costs
1.
The losing party to proceedings for revocation or cancellation of a Community plant variety right, or to appeal proceedings shall bear the costs incurred by the other party to proceedings as well as all costs incurred by him essential to the proceedings, including travel and subsistence and the remuneration of an agent, adviser or advocate, within the limits of the scales set for each category of costs under the conditions laid down in the implementing rules pursuant to Article 114.
2.
However, where each party to proceedings succeeds on some and fails on other heads, or if reasons of equity so dictate, the Office or Board of Appeal shall decide a different apportionment of costs.
3.
The party to proceedings who terminates the proceedings by withdrawing the application for a Community plant variety right, the application for revocation or cancellation of rights, or the appeal, or by surrendering the Community plant variety rights, shall bear the costs incurred by the other party to proceedings as stipulated in paragraphs 1 and 2.
4.
Where the parties to proceedings conclude before the Office, or Board of Appeal a settlement of costs differing from that provided for in the preceding paragraphs, note shall be taken of that agreement.
5.
On request, the Office or Board of Appeal shall determine the amount of the costs to be paid pursuant to the preceding paragraphs.
Your change, as a redline
Article 85 Apportionment of costs
1.
The losing party to proceedings for revocation or cancellation of a Community plant variety right, or to appeal proceedings shall bear the costs incurred by the other party to proceedings as well as all costs incurred by him essential to the proceedings, including travel and subsistence and the remuneration of an agent, adviser or advocate, within the limits of the scales set for each category of costs under the conditions laid down in the implementing rules pursuant to Article 114.
2.
However, where each party to proceedings succeeds on some and fails on other heads, or if reasons of equity so dictate, the Office or Board of Appeal shall decide a different apportionment of costs.
3.
The party to proceedings who terminates the proceedings by withdrawing the application for a Community plant variety right, the application for revocation or cancellation of rights, or the appeal, or by surrendering the Community plant variety rights, shall bear the costs incurred by the other party to proceedings as stipulated in paragraphs 1 and 2.
4.
Where the parties to proceedings conclude before the Office, or Board of Appeal a settlement of costs differing from that provided for in the preceding paragraphs, note shall be taken of that agreement.
5.
On request, the Office or Board of Appeal shall determine the amount of the costs to be paid pursuant to the preceding paragraphs.
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.
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.