Football Governance Act 2025
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
82 Request for internal review
(1) Where the IFR makes a reviewable decision, a concerned person may request a review of that decision by the applicable reviewer. (2) A concerned person may request a review by notifying the IFR within the period of seven days beginning with the day on which the person is notified of their right to request a review under section 81(1)(a). (3) Where a review of a reviewable decision is requested under this section, the IFR must, as soon as reasonably practicable after the request is made, decide whether or not to carry out a review. (4) The IFR may only decide not to carry out a review if— (a) an appeal has been made against the reviewable decision under section 84(1) (whether by a concerned person or any other person with a sufficient interest in the decision), (b) the request is for a review of a decision that is not a reviewable decision, or (c) the IFR considers that— (i) the person requesting the review is not a concerned person, (ii) the request for a review is vexatious, or (iii) there is no reasonable prospect of a review resulting in the decision being varied or cancelled. (5) Where the IFR decides not to carry out a review of a reviewable decision— (a) the IFR must notify each concerned person of its decision and the reasons for that decision, (b) the applicable reviewer is treated as having decided to uphold the reviewable decision, and (c) the IFR must, as soon as reasonably practicable after giving the notice required under paragraph (a), publish notice of the fact that the applicable reviewer is treated as having decided to uphold the reviewable decision. (6) Where the IFR decides to carry out a review of a reviewable decision, it must notify each concerned person of its decision. (7) A request for a review under this section does not suspend the effect of the decision to which the review relates except so far as a direction suspending the effect of the decision is given by the applicable reviewer. (8) But the applicable reviewer may not give a direction suspending the effect of a decision of the IFR to— (a) attach a discretionary licence condition to, or vary a discretionary licence condition attached to, an operating licence in a case where the IFR was not required to give notice of attaching or varying the condition by virtue of section 23(6); (b) give a direction under section 41 (directions relating to unsuitable owners and officers); (c) specify a competition as a prohibited competition under section 45; (d) give an urgent direction under section 79; (e) suspend or revoke an operating licence under paragraph 9 of Schedule 9 by virtue of the third aggravating condition in paragraph 8 of that Schedule being met. (9) In the case of a reviewable decision in relation to which the applicable reviewer is a committee of the Expert Panel, the Chief Executive Officer must, as soon as reasonably practicable after the IFR has given notice under subsection (6), establish a committee of the Expert Panel to carry out the review (see paragraph 28 of Schedule 2). (10) In a case where— (a) the reviewable decision was made by a committee of the Expert Panel (“the deciding committee”), and (b) the applicable reviewer in relation to that decision is also a committee of the Expert Panel (“the reviewing committee”), the Chief Executive Officer may not appoint to the reviewing committee a member of the Expert Panel who was a member of the deciding committee. (11) In a case where the reviewable decision was made by the Board and the applicable reviewer in relation to that decision is also the Board, any member of the Board who took part in the decision may not take part in the review.
82 Request for internal review
(1) Where the IFR makes a reviewable decision, a concerned person may request a review of that decision by the applicable reviewer. (2) A concerned person may request a review by notifying the IFR within the period of seven days beginning with the day on which the person is notified of their right to request a review under section 81(1)(a). (3) Where a review of a reviewable decision is requested under this section, the IFR must, as soon as reasonably practicable after the request is made, decide whether or not to carry out a review. (4) The IFR may only decide not to carry out a review if— (a) an appeal has been made against the reviewable decision under section 84(1) (whether by a concerned person or any other person with a sufficient interest in the decision), (b) the request is for a review of a decision that is not a reviewable decision, or (c) the IFR considers that— (i) the person requesting the review is not a concerned person, (ii) the request for a review is vexatious, or (iii) there is no reasonable prospect of a review resulting in the decision being varied or cancelled. (5) Where the IFR decides not to carry out a review of a reviewable decision— (a) the IFR must notify each concerned person of its decision and the reasons for that decision, (b) the applicable reviewer is treated as having decided to uphold the reviewable decision, and (c) the IFR must, as soon as reasonably practicable after giving the notice required under paragraph (a), publish notice of the fact that the applicable reviewer is treated as having decided to uphold the reviewable decision. (6) Where the IFR decides to carry out a review of a reviewable decision, it must notify each concerned person of its decision. (7) A request for a review under this section does not suspend the effect of the decision to which the review relates except so far as a direction suspending the effect of the decision is given by the applicable reviewer. (8) But the applicable reviewer may not give a direction suspending the effect of a decision of the IFR to— (a) attach a discretionary licence condition to, or vary a discretionary licence condition attached to, an operating licence in a case where the IFR was not required to give notice of attaching or varying the condition by virtue of section 23(6); (b) give a direction under section 41 (directions relating to unsuitable owners and officers); (c) specify a competition as a prohibited competition under section 45; (d) give an urgent direction under section 79; (e) suspend or revoke an operating licence under paragraph 9 of Schedule 9 by virtue of the third aggravating condition in paragraph 8 of that Schedule being met. (9) In the case of a reviewable decision in relation to which the applicable reviewer is a committee of the Expert Panel, the Chief Executive Officer must, as soon as reasonably practicable after the IFR has given notice under subsection (6), establish a committee of the Expert Panel to carry out the review (see paragraph 28 of Schedule 2). (10) In a case where— (a) the reviewable decision was made by a committee of the Expert Panel (“the deciding committee”), and (b) the applicable reviewer in relation to that decision is also a committee of the Expert Panel (“the reviewing committee”), the Chief Executive Officer may not appoint to the reviewing committee a member of the Expert Panel who was a member of the deciding committee. (11) In a case where the reviewable decision was made by the Board and the applicable reviewer in relation to that decision is also the Board, any member of the Board who took part in the decision may not take part in the review.
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.