The Clergy Conduct Rules 2026
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
51 Expert reports
(1) No party to a complaint of serious misconduct may call an expert or put in evidence an expert report without the permission of the Chair of the tribunal or court dealing with the complaint. (2) Expert evidence must be given in the form of a single written report by experts acting jointly on the instructions of the parties acting jointly unless the Chair, having had due regard to the overriding objective, considers that it would be in the interests of justice for a separate written report to be prepared in relation to either or each party by an expert acting on the instructions of that party. (3) Where the Chair gives permission to put in evidence an expert report, the Chair must direct that the report satisfies each of the following requirements— (a) it must contain a statement that each expert understands the duty which that expert has to the tribunal or court and has complied with that duty; (b) it must be addressed to the tribunal or court (and not to the parties by whom the experts are instructed); (c) it must specify each expert’s qualifications; (d) it must give details of the material on which the experts have relied in making the report; (e) it must contain a statement of the substance of the facts and instructions which are material to the opinions given in the report or on which those opinions are based; (f) it must specify those of the facts stated in the report which are within the experts’ own knowledge and those which are not; (g) it must specify who carried out any examination, measurement, test or experiment which the experts have used for the report, specify that person’s qualifications and indicate whether the examination, measurement, test or experiment was carried out under the experts’ supervision; (h) if there is a range of opinions on matters in the report, it must summarise those opinions and give reasons for each expert’s own opinion; (i) it must summarise the conclusions reached; (j) if the experts are unable to give an opinion without qualification, it must specify that qualification. (4) The expert report must be signed and dated by each expert and verified by a statement of truth in the following form— I confirm that I have specified those of the facts stated in this report which are within my own knowledge and those which are not. Those within my own knowledge I confirm to be true. The opinions I have expressed represent my own true and complete expert opinion on the matters to which they refer. (5) Where a separate written report is prepared in relation to a party by an expert acting on the instructions of that party, the references in paragraphs (3) and (4) to the experts or parties are to be read as references to the expert or party concerned.
51 Expert reports
(1) No party to a complaint of serious misconduct may call an expert or put in evidence an expert report without the permission of the Chair of the tribunal or court dealing with the complaint. (2) Expert evidence must be given in the form of a single written report by experts acting jointly on the instructions of the parties acting jointly unless the Chair, having had due regard to the overriding objective, considers that it would be in the interests of justice for a separate written report to be prepared in relation to either or each party by an expert acting on the instructions of that party. (3) Where the Chair gives permission to put in evidence an expert report, the Chair must direct that the report satisfies each of the following requirements— (a) it must contain a statement that each expert understands the duty which that expert has to the tribunal or court and has complied with that duty; (b) it must be addressed to the tribunal or court (and not to the parties by whom the experts are instructed); (c) it must specify each expert’s qualifications; (d) it must give details of the material on which the experts have relied in making the report; (e) it must contain a statement of the substance of the facts and instructions which are material to the opinions given in the report or on which those opinions are based; (f) it must specify those of the facts stated in the report which are within the experts’ own knowledge and those which are not; (g) it must specify who carried out any examination, measurement, test or experiment which the experts have used for the report, specify that person’s qualifications and indicate whether the examination, measurement, test or experiment was carried out under the experts’ supervision; (h) if there is a range of opinions on matters in the report, it must summarise those opinions and give reasons for each expert’s own opinion; (i) it must summarise the conclusions reached; (j) if the experts are unable to give an opinion without qualification, it must specify that qualification. (4) The expert report must be signed and dated by each expert and verified by a statement of truth in the following form— I confirm that I have specified those of the facts stated in this report which are within my own knowledge and those which are not. Those within my own knowledge I confirm to be true. The opinions I have expressed represent my own true and complete expert opinion on the matters to which they refer. (5) Where a separate written report is prepared in relation to a party by an expert acting on the instructions of that party, the references in paragraphs (3) and (4) to the experts or parties are to be read as references to the expert or party concerned.
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.