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
13 Precedence of judges of Senior Courts.
(1) When sitting in the Court of Appeal—
(a) the Lord Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls shall rank in that order; and
(b) judges of the Supreme Court and persons who have been Lord Chancellor shall rank next after the Master of the Rolls and, among themselves, according to the priority of the dates on which they respectively became judges of the Supreme Court or Lord Chancellor, as the case may be.
(2) Subject to subsection (1)(b), the President of the Queen's Bench Division shall rank next after the Master of the Rolls.
(2A) The President of the Family Division shall rank next after the President of the Queen's Bench Division.
(3) The President of the Business and Property Division shall rank next after the President of the Family Division.
(4) The vice-president or vice-presidents of the divisions of the Court of Appeal shall rank next after the President of the Business and Property Division; and if there are two vice-presidents of those divisions, they shall rank, among themselves, according to the priority of the dates on which they respectively became vice-presidents.
(5) The Lords Justices of Appeal (other than the vice-president or vice-presidents of the divisions of the Court of Appeal) shall rank after the ex-officio judges of the Court of Appeal and, among themselves, according to the priority of the dates on which they respectively became judges of that court.
(6) The puisne judges of the High Court shall rank next after the judges of the Court of Appeal and, among themselves, according to the priority of the dates on which they respectively became judges of the High Court.
Your change, as a redline
13 Precedence of judges of Senior Courts.
(1) When sitting in the Court of Appeal—
(a) the Lord Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls shall rank in that order; and
(b) judges of the Supreme Court and persons who have been Lord Chancellor shall rank next after the Master of the Rolls and, among themselves, according to the priority of the dates on which they respectively became judges of the Supreme Court or Lord Chancellor, as the case may be.
(2) Subject to subsection (1)(b), the President of the Queen's Bench Division shall rank next after the Master of the Rolls.
(2A) The President of the Family Division shall rank next after the President of the Queen's Bench Division.
(3) The President of the Business and Property Division shall rank next after the President of the Family Division.
(4) The vice-president or vice-presidents of the divisions of the Court of Appeal shall rank next after the President of the Business and Property Division; and if there are two vice-presidents of those divisions, they shall rank, among themselves, according to the priority of the dates on which they respectively became vice-presidents.
(5) The Lords Justices of Appeal (other than the vice-president or vice-presidents of the divisions of the Court of Appeal) shall rank after the ex-officio judges of the Court of Appeal and, among themselves, according to the priority of the dates on which they respectively became judges of that court.
(6) The puisne judges of the High Court shall rank next after the judges of the Court of Appeal and, among themselves, according to the priority of the dates on which they respectively became judges of the High Court.
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.