Counter-Terrorism and Security Act 2015
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
3 Temporary exclusion orders: prior permission of the court
(1) This section applies if the Secretary of State— (a) makes the relevant decisions in relation to an individual, and (b) makes an application to the court for permission to impose a temporary exclusion order on the individual. (2) The function of the court on the application is to determine whether the relevant decisions of the Secretary of State are obviously flawed. (3) The court may consider the application— (a) in the absence of the individual, (b) without the individual having been notified of the application, and (c) without the individual having been given an opportunity (if the individual was aware of the application) of making any representations to the court. (4) But that does not limit the matters about which rules of court may be made. (5) In determining the application, the court must apply the principles applicable on an application for judicial review. (6) In a case where the court determines that any of the relevant decisions of the Secretary of State is obviously flawed, the court may not give permission under this section. (7) In any other case, the court must give permission under this section. (8) Schedule 2 makes provision for references to the court etc where temporary exclusion orders are imposed in cases of urgency. (9) Only the Secretary of State may appeal against a determination of the court under— (a) this section, or (b) Schedule 2; and such an appeal may only be made on a question of law. (10) In this section “the relevant decisions” means the decisions that the following conditions are met— (a) condition A; (b) condition B; (c) condition C; (d) condition D.
3 Temporary exclusion orders: prior permission of the court
(1) This section applies if the Secretary of State— (a) makes the relevant decisions in relation to an individual, and (b) makes an application to the court for permission to impose a temporary exclusion order on the individual. (2) The function of the court on the application is to determine whether the relevant decisions of the Secretary of State are obviously flawed. (3) The court may consider the application— (a) in the absence of the individual, (b) without the individual having been notified of the application, and (c) without the individual having been given an opportunity (if the individual was aware of the application) of making any representations to the court. (4) But that does not limit the matters about which rules of court may be made. (5) In determining the application, the court must apply the principles applicable on an application for judicial review. (6) In a case where the court determines that any of the relevant decisions of the Secretary of State is obviously flawed, the court may not give permission under this section. (7) In any other case, the court must give permission under this section. (8) Schedule 2 makes provision for references to the court etc where temporary exclusion orders are imposed in cases of urgency. (9) Only the Secretary of State may appeal against a determination of the court under— (a) this section, or (b) Schedule 2; and such an appeal may only be made on a question of law. (10) In this section “the relevant decisions” means the decisions that the following conditions are met— (a) condition A; (b) condition B; (c) condition C; (d) condition D.
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.