Mineral Workings (Offshore Installations) Act 1971
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 Offences: general provisions.
(1) Where an offence under this Act which has been committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to any neglect on the part of, a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or any person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, shall be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. In this subsection “director”, in relation to a body corporate established by or under any enactment for the purpose of carrying on under public ownership any industry or part of an industry or undertaking, being a body corporate whose affairs are managed by its members, means a member of that body corporate. (2) In proceedings for an offence under this Act an averment in any process of the fact that anything was done or situated within controlled waters shall, until the contrary is proved, be sufficient evidence of that fact as stated in the averment. (3) In proceedings for an offence under section 3, . . .of this Act, it shall be a defence for the accused to prove— (a) that he has used all due diligence to enforce the execution of this Act, and of any relevant regulation made under this Act, and (b) that any relevant contravention was committed without his consent, connivance or wilful default. (4) Proceedings for any offence under this Act may be taken, and the offence may for all incidental purposes be treated as having been committed, in any place in the United Kingdom. (5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
9 Offences: general provisions.
(1) Where an offence under this Act which has been committed by a body corporate is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to any neglect on the part of, a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or any person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, shall be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly. In this subsection “director”, in relation to a body corporate established by or under any enactment for the purpose of carrying on under public ownership any industry or part of an industry or undertaking, being a body corporate whose affairs are managed by its members, means a member of that body corporate. (2) In proceedings for an offence under this Act an averment in any process of the fact that anything was done or situated within controlled waters shall, until the contrary is proved, be sufficient evidence of that fact as stated in the averment. (3) In proceedings for an offence under section 3, . . .of this Act, it shall be a defence for the accused to prove— (a) that he has used all due diligence to enforce the execution of this Act, and of any relevant regulation made under this Act, and (b) that any relevant contravention was committed without his consent, connivance or wilful default. (4) Proceedings for any offence under this Act may be taken, and the offence may for all incidental purposes be treated as having been committed, in any place in the United Kingdom. (5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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.