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
97 Production of documents by person not party to complaint
(1) In the case of an appeal or review arising from a complaint of serious misconduct, the respondent to the complaint or the Investigation and Tribunals Team may apply for an order for the production of documents by a person who was not a party to the complaint. (2) The respondent may not apply for an order for the production of documents by the Investigation and Tribunals Team. (3) The application must be made to the Chair of the appellate court or to the Dean of the Arches and Auditor sitting alone. (4) The application must be made in accordance with rule 105. (5) The applicant must give a copy of the application to— (a) the Investigation and Tribunals Team or the respondent (as the case may be), (b) the complainant, and (c) if a relevant safeguarding professional was a party to the complaint, that party. (6) The Chair of the appellate court or the Dean of the Arches and Auditor may make an order on the application only if satisfied that the provision of documents specified or described in the application is relevant and necessary for dealing justly with the appeal or review. (7) Where an order is made under this rule, permission under rule 96 is to be treated as given for any documents produced in response to the order to be put before the appellate court. (8) Rules 39(8) and (9) and 40(1) and (2) (contempt of court etc.) apply to an order under this rule as they apply to an order under rule 39; and for that purpose, rule 40(1) and (2) has effect as if the references to the President of Tribunals were references to the Chair of the appellate court or the Dean of the Arches and Auditor.
97 Production of documents by person not party to complaint
(1) In the case of an appeal or review arising from a complaint of serious misconduct, the respondent to the complaint or the Investigation and Tribunals Team may apply for an order for the production of documents by a person who was not a party to the complaint. (2) The respondent may not apply for an order for the production of documents by the Investigation and Tribunals Team. (3) The application must be made to the Chair of the appellate court or to the Dean of the Arches and Auditor sitting alone. (4) The application must be made in accordance with rule 105. (5) The applicant must give a copy of the application to— (a) the Investigation and Tribunals Team or the respondent (as the case may be), (b) the complainant, and (c) if a relevant safeguarding professional was a party to the complaint, that party. (6) The Chair of the appellate court or the Dean of the Arches and Auditor may make an order on the application only if satisfied that the provision of documents specified or described in the application is relevant and necessary for dealing justly with the appeal or review. (7) Where an order is made under this rule, permission under rule 96 is to be treated as given for any documents produced in response to the order to be put before the appellate court. (8) Rules 39(8) and (9) and 40(1) and (2) (contempt of court etc.) apply to an order under this rule as they apply to an order under rule 39; and for that purpose, rule 40(1) and (2) has effect as if the references to the President of Tribunals were references to the Chair of the appellate court or the Dean of the Arches and Auditor.
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.