Family Law Act 1996
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
38 Neither cohabitant or former cohabitant entitled to occupy.
(1) This section applies if— (a) one cohabitant or former cohabitant and the other cohabitant or former cohabitant occupy a dwelling-house which is the home in which they cohabit or cohabited; but (b) neither of them is entitled to remain in occupation— (i) by virtue of a beneficial estate or interest or contract; or (ii) by virtue of any enactment giving him the right to remain in occupation. (2) Either of the parties may apply to the court for an order against the other under this section. (3) An order under this section may— (a) require the respondent to permit the applicant to enter and remain in the dwelling-house or part of the dwelling-house; (b) regulate the occupation of the dwelling-house by either or both of the parties; (c) require the respondent to leave the dwelling-house or part of the dwelling-house; or (d) exclude the respondent from a defined area in which the dwelling-house is included. (4) In deciding whether to exercise its powers to include one or more of the provisions referred to in subsection (3) ( “a subsection (3) provision”) and (if so) in what manner, the court shall have regard to all the circumstances including— (a) the housing needs and housing resources of each of the parties and of any relevant child; (b) the financial resources of each of the parties; (c) the likely effect of any order, or of any decision by the court not to exercise its powers under subsection (3), on the health, safety or well-being of the parties and of any relevant child; (d) the conduct of the parties in relation to each other and otherwise; and (e) the questions mentioned in subsection (5). (5) The questions are— (a) whether the applicant or any relevant child is likely to suffer significant harm attributable to conduct of the respondent if the subsection (3) provision is not included in the order; and (b) whether the harm likely to be suffered by the respondent or child if the provision is included is as great as or greater than the harm attributable to conduct of the respondent which is likely to be suffered by the applicant or child if the provision is not included. (6) An order under this section shall be limited so as to have effect for a specified period not exceeding six months, but may be extended on one occasion for a further specified period not exceeding six months.
38 Neither cohabitant or former cohabitant entitled to occupy.
(1) This section applies if— (a) one cohabitant or former cohabitant and the other cohabitant or former cohabitant occupy a dwelling-house which is the home in which they cohabit or cohabited; but (b) neither of them is entitled to remain in occupation— (i) by virtue of a beneficial estate or interest or contract; or (ii) by virtue of any enactment giving him the right to remain in occupation. (2) Either of the parties may apply to the court for an order against the other under this section. (3) An order under this section may— (a) require the respondent to permit the applicant to enter and remain in the dwelling-house or part of the dwelling-house; (b) regulate the occupation of the dwelling-house by either or both of the parties; (c) require the respondent to leave the dwelling-house or part of the dwelling-house; or (d) exclude the respondent from a defined area in which the dwelling-house is included. (4) In deciding whether to exercise its powers to include one or more of the provisions referred to in subsection (3) ( “a subsection (3) provision”) and (if so) in what manner, the court shall have regard to all the circumstances including— (a) the housing needs and housing resources of each of the parties and of any relevant child; (b) the financial resources of each of the parties; (c) the likely effect of any order, or of any decision by the court not to exercise its powers under subsection (3), on the health, safety or well-being of the parties and of any relevant child; (d) the conduct of the parties in relation to each other and otherwise; and (e) the questions mentioned in subsection (5). (5) The questions are— (a) whether the applicant or any relevant child is likely to suffer significant harm attributable to conduct of the respondent if the subsection (3) provision is not included in the order; and (b) whether the harm likely to be suffered by the respondent or child if the provision is included is as great as or greater than the harm attributable to conduct of the respondent which is likely to be suffered by the applicant or child if the provision is not included. (6) An order under this section shall be limited so as to have effect for a specified period not exceeding six months, but may be extended on one occasion for a further specified period not exceeding six months.
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.