Counter-Terrorism Act 2008
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
66 General provisions about rules of court
(1) The following provisions apply to rules of court relating to— (a) financial restrictions proceedings, or (b) proceedings on an appeal relating to financial restrictions proceedings. (2) A person making rules of court must have regard to— (a) the need to secure that the decisions that are the subject of the proceedings are properly reviewed; and (b) the need to secure that disclosures of information are not made where they would be contrary to the public interest. (3) Rules of court may make provision— (a) about the mode of proof and about evidence in the proceedings; (b) enabling or requiring the proceedings to be determined without a hearing; and (c) about legal representation in the proceedings. (4) Rules of court may make provision— (a) enabling the proceedings to take place without full particulars of the reasons for the decisions to which the proceedings relate being given to a party to the proceedings (or to any legal representative of that party); (b) enabling the court to conduct proceedings in the absence of any person, including a party to the proceedings (or any legal representative of that party); (c) about the functions of a person appointed as a special advocate; (d) enabling the court to give a party to the proceedings a summary of evidence taken in the party's absence. (5) In this section— (a) references to a party to the proceedings do not include the Treasury; (b) references to a party's legal representative do not include a person appointed as a special advocate. (6) Nothing in this section shall be read as restricting the power to make rules of court or the matters to be taken into account when doing so.
66 General provisions about rules of court
(1) The following provisions apply to rules of court relating to— (a) financial restrictions proceedings, or (b) proceedings on an appeal relating to financial restrictions proceedings. (2) A person making rules of court must have regard to— (a) the need to secure that the decisions that are the subject of the proceedings are properly reviewed; and (b) the need to secure that disclosures of information are not made where they would be contrary to the public interest. (3) Rules of court may make provision— (a) about the mode of proof and about evidence in the proceedings; (b) enabling or requiring the proceedings to be determined without a hearing; and (c) about legal representation in the proceedings. (4) Rules of court may make provision— (a) enabling the proceedings to take place without full particulars of the reasons for the decisions to which the proceedings relate being given to a party to the proceedings (or to any legal representative of that party); (b) enabling the court to conduct proceedings in the absence of any person, including a party to the proceedings (or any legal representative of that party); (c) about the functions of a person appointed as a special advocate; (d) enabling the court to give a party to the proceedings a summary of evidence taken in the party's absence. (5) In this section— (a) references to a party to the proceedings do not include the Treasury; (b) references to a party's legal representative do not include a person appointed as a special advocate. (6) Nothing in this section shall be read as restricting the power to make rules of court or the matters to be taken into account when doing so.
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.