The Relevant Licensee Nuclear Company Administration (England and Wales) Rules 2023
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
As published
37 Complaint by or in relation to excluded persons, etc.
(1) Any person may make a complaint who—
(a) is, or claims to be, an excluded person, or
(b) attends the meeting, whether in person or by proxy (by virtue of rule 33), and claims to have been adversely affected by the actual, apparent or claimed exclusion of another person.
(2) The person to whom the complaint must be made (“the appropriate person”) is—
(a) the chair, where it is made during the course of the meeting;
(b) the nuclear administrator, where it is made after the meeting.
(3) A complaint must be made as soon as reasonably practicable and, in any event, no later than 4.00 p.m. on the business day following—
(a) the day on which the person was, appeared or claimed to be excluded, or
(b) where an indication is sought under rule 36, the day on which the complainant received the indication.
(4) The appropriate person must, as soon as reasonably practicable following receipt of the complaint—
(a) consider whether there is an excluded person,
(b) where satisfied that there is an excluded person, consider the complaint, and
(c) where satisfied that there has been prejudice, take such action as the appropriate person considers fit to remedy the prejudice.
(5) Paragraph (6) applies where—
(a) the appropriate person is satisfied that the complainant is an excluded person,
(b) during the period of the person’s exclusion a resolution was put to the meeting and voted on, and
(c) the excluded person asserts how the excluded person intended to vote on the resolution.
(6) Subject to paragraph (7), where satisfied that the effect of the intended vote in paragraph (5), if cast, would have changed the result of the resolution, the appropriate person must—
(a) count the intended vote as being cast in accordance with the complainant’s stated intention,
(b) amend the record of the result of the resolution, and
(c) where notice of the result of the resolution has been delivered to those entitled to attend the meeting, deliver notice to them of the change.
(7) Where satisfied that more than one complainant is an excluded person, the appropriate person must have regard to the combined effect of the intended votes.
(8) The appropriate person must deliver notice to the complainant of any decision as soon as reasonably practicable.
(9) A complainant who is not satisfied by the action of the appropriate person may apply to the court for directions and any application must be made no more than two business days from the date of receiving the decision of the appropriate person.
(10) In this rule, “excluded person” has the meaning given in rule 35(1).
Your change, as a redline
37 Complaint by or in relation to excluded persons, etc.
(1) Any person may make a complaint who—
(a) is, or claims to be, an excluded person, or
(b) attends the meeting, whether in person or by proxy (by virtue of rule 33), and claims to have been adversely affected by the actual, apparent or claimed exclusion of another person.
(2) The person to whom the complaint must be made (“the appropriate person”) is—
(a) the chair, where it is made during the course of the meeting;
(b) the nuclear administrator, where it is made after the meeting.
(3) A complaint must be made as soon as reasonably practicable and, in any event, no later than 4.00 p.m. on the business day following—
(a) the day on which the person was, appeared or claimed to be excluded, or
(b) where an indication is sought under rule 36, the day on which the complainant received the indication.
(4) The appropriate person must, as soon as reasonably practicable following receipt of the complaint—
(a) consider whether there is an excluded person,
(b) where satisfied that there is an excluded person, consider the complaint, and
(c) where satisfied that there has been prejudice, take such action as the appropriate person considers fit to remedy the prejudice.
(5) Paragraph (6) applies where—
(a) the appropriate person is satisfied that the complainant is an excluded person,
(b) during the period of the person’s exclusion a resolution was put to the meeting and voted on, and
(c) the excluded person asserts how the excluded person intended to vote on the resolution.
(6) Subject to paragraph (7), where satisfied that the effect of the intended vote in paragraph (5), if cast, would have changed the result of the resolution, the appropriate person must—
(a) count the intended vote as being cast in accordance with the complainant’s stated intention,
(b) amend the record of the result of the resolution, and
(c) where notice of the result of the resolution has been delivered to those entitled to attend the meeting, deliver notice to them of the change.
(7) Where satisfied that more than one complainant is an excluded person, the appropriate person must have regard to the combined effect of the intended votes.
(8) The appropriate person must deliver notice to the complainant of any decision as soon as reasonably practicable.
(9) A complainant who is not satisfied by the action of the appropriate person may apply to the court for directions and any application must be made no more than two business days from the date of receiving the decision of the appropriate person.
(10) In this rule, “excluded person” has the meaning given in rule 35(1).
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.
How this law is officially changed
Solon does not know this law's official route yet. The proposal is recorded all the same, and the route appears here once its source is added.
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.
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.