Juries Act 1974
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
9 Excusal for certain persons and discretionary excusal.
(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2) If any person summoned under this Act shows to the satisfaction of the appropriate officer that there is good reason why he should be excused from attending in pursuance of the summons, the appropriate officer may , subject to section 9A(1A) of this Act, excuse him from so attending . . . . (2A) Without prejudice to subsection (2) above, the appropriate officer shall excuse a member of the regular forces from attending in pursuance of a summons if— (a) that member’s commanding officer certifies to the appropriate officer that it would be prejudicial to the efficiency of the service if that member were to be required to be absent from duty, and (b) subsection (2A) or (2B) of section 9A of this Act applies. (2B) Subsection (2A) above does not affect the application of subsection (2) above to a member of the regular forces in a case where he is not entitled to be excused under subsection (2A). (3) Criminal Procedure Rules shall provide a right of appeal to the court (or one of the courts) before which the person is summoned to attend against any refusal of the appropriate officer to excuse him under subsection (2) above or any failure by the appropriate officer to excuse him as required by subsection (2A) above. (4) Without prejudice to the preceding provisions of this section, the court (or any of the courts) before which a person is summoned to attend under this Act may excuse that person from so attending;
9 Excusal for certain persons and discretionary excusal.
(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2) If any person summoned under this Act shows to the satisfaction of the appropriate officer that there is good reason why he should be excused from attending in pursuance of the summons, the appropriate officer may , subject to section 9A(1A) of this Act, excuse him from so attending . . . . (2A) Without prejudice to subsection (2) above, the appropriate officer shall excuse a member of the regular forces from attending in pursuance of a summons if— (a) that member’s commanding officer certifies to the appropriate officer that it would be prejudicial to the efficiency of the service if that member were to be required to be absent from duty, and (b) subsection (2A) or (2B) of section 9A of this Act applies. (2B) Subsection (2A) above does not affect the application of subsection (2) above to a member of the regular forces in a case where he is not entitled to be excused under subsection (2A). (3) Criminal Procedure Rules shall provide a right of appeal to the court (or one of the courts) before which the person is summoned to attend against any refusal of the appropriate officer to excuse him under subsection (2) above or any failure by the appropriate officer to excuse him as required by subsection (2A) above. (4) Without prejudice to the preceding provisions of this section, the court (or any of the courts) before which a person is summoned to attend under this Act may excuse that person from so attending;
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.