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
43 Power of High Court to vary sentence on application for quashing order.
(1) Where a person who has been sentenced for an offence—
(a) by a magistrates’ court; or
(b) by the Crown Court after being convicted of the offence by a magistrates’ court and committed to the Crown Court for sentence; or
(c) by the Crown Court on appeal against conviction or sentence,
applies to the High Court in accordance with section 31 for an a quashing order to remove the proceedings of the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court into the High Court, then, if the High Court determines that the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court had no power to pass the sentence, the High Court may, instead of quashing the conviction, amend it by substituting for the sentence passed any sentence which the magistrates’ court or, in a case within paragraph (b), the Crown Court had power to impose.
(2) Any sentence passed by the High Court by virtue of this section in substitution for the sentence passed in the proceedings of the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court shall, unless the High Court otherwise directs, begin to run from the time when it would have begun to run if passed in those proceedings; but in computing the term of the sentence, any time during which the offender was released on bail in pursuance of section 37(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 1948 shall be disregarded.
(3) Subsections (1) and (2) shall, with the necessary modifications, apply in relation to any order of a magistrates’ court or the Crown Court which is made on, but does not form part of, the conviction of an offender as they apply in relation to a conviction and sentence.
Your change, as a redline
43 Power of High Court to vary sentence on application for quashing order.
(1) Where a person who has been sentenced for an offence—
(a) by a magistrates’ court; or
(b) by the Crown Court after being convicted of the offence by a magistrates’ court and committed to the Crown Court for sentence; or
(c) by the Crown Court on appeal against conviction or sentence,
applies to the High Court in accordance with section 31 for an a quashing order to remove the proceedings of the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court into the High Court, then, if the High Court determines that the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court had no power to pass the sentence, the High Court may, instead of quashing the conviction, amend it by substituting for the sentence passed any sentence which the magistrates’ court or, in a case within paragraph (b), the Crown Court had power to impose.
(2) Any sentence passed by the High Court by virtue of this section in substitution for the sentence passed in the proceedings of the magistrates’ court or the Crown Court shall, unless the High Court otherwise directs, begin to run from the time when it would have begun to run if passed in those proceedings; but in computing the term of the sentence, any time during which the offender was released on bail in pursuance of section 37(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 1948 shall be disregarded.
(3) Subsections (1) and (2) shall, with the necessary modifications, apply in relation to any order of a magistrates’ court or the Crown Court which is made on, but does not form part of, the conviction of an offender as they apply in relation to a conviction and sentence.
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.