European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018
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
SCHEDULE 1 Further provision about exceptions to savings and incorporation
Section 5(6) Challenges to validity of assimilated law 1 (1) There is no right in domestic law on or after IP completion day to challenge any assimilated law on the basis that, immediately before IP completion day, an EU instrument was invalid. (2) Sub-paragraph (1) does not apply so far as— (a) the European Court has decided before IP completion day that the instrument is invalid, or (b) the challenge is of a kind described, or provided for, in regulations made by a Minister of the Crown. (3) Regulations under sub-paragraph (2)(b) may (among other things) provide for a challenge which would otherwise have been against an EU institution to be against a public authority in the United Kingdom. ... 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rule in Francovich 4 There is no right in domestic law on or after IP completion day to damages in accordance with the rule in Francovich. Interpretation 5 (1) References in section 5 and this Schedule to the principle of the supremacy of EU law, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, any general principle of EU law or the rule in Francovich are to be read as references to that principle, Charter or rule so far as it would otherwise continue to be, or form part of, domestic law on or after IP completion day by virtue of section 2, 3, 4 or 6(3) or (6) and otherwise in accordance with this Act. (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
SCHEDULE 1 Further provision about exceptions to savings and incorporation
Section 5(6) Challenges to validity of assimilated law 1 (1) There is no right in domestic law on or after IP completion day to challenge any assimilated law on the basis that, immediately before IP completion day, an EU instrument was invalid. (2) Sub-paragraph (1) does not apply so far as— (a) the European Court has decided before IP completion day that the instrument is invalid, or (b) the challenge is of a kind described, or provided for, in regulations made by a Minister of the Crown. (3) Regulations under sub-paragraph (2)(b) may (among other things) provide for a challenge which would otherwise have been against an EU institution to be against a public authority in the United Kingdom. ... 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rule in Francovich 4 There is no right in domestic law on or after IP completion day to damages in accordance with the rule in Francovich. Interpretation 5 (1) References in section 5 and this Schedule to the principle of the supremacy of EU law, the Charter of Fundamental Rights, any general principle of EU law or the rule in Francovich are to be read as references to that principle, Charter or rule so far as it would otherwise continue to be, or form part of, domestic law on or after IP completion day by virtue of section 2, 3, 4 or 6(3) or (6) and otherwise in accordance with this Act. (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
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.