National Security Act 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
42 Prior permission of the court
(1) This section applies if the Secretary of State— (a) makes the relevant decisions in relation to an individual, and (b) makes an application to the court for permission to impose measures on the individual. (2) The application must set out a draft of the proposed Part 2 notice. (3) The function of the court on the application is— (a) to determine whether the relevant decisions of the Secretary of State are obviously flawed, and (b) to determine whether to give permission to impose measures on the individual and (where applicable) whether to exercise the power of direction under subsection (9). (4) The court may consider the application— (a) in the absence of the individual, (b) without the individual having been notified of the application, and (c) without the individual having been given an opportunity (if the individual was aware of the application) of making any representations to the court. (5) But that does not limit the matters about which rules of court may be made. (6) In determining the application, the court must apply the principles applicable on an application for judicial review. (7) In a case where the court determines that a decision of the Secretary of State that condition A, condition B or condition C is met is obviously flawed, the court may not give permission under this section. (8) In any other case, the court may give permission under this section. (9) If the court determines that the Secretary of State's decision that condition D is met is obviously flawed, the court may (in addition to giving permission under subsection (8)) give directions to the Secretary of State in relation to the measures to be imposed on the individual. (10) In this section “relevant decisions” means the decisions that the following conditions are met— (a) condition A, (b) condition B, (c) condition C, and (d) condition D.
42 Prior permission of the court
(1) This section applies if the Secretary of State— (a) makes the relevant decisions in relation to an individual, and (b) makes an application to the court for permission to impose measures on the individual. (2) The application must set out a draft of the proposed Part 2 notice. (3) The function of the court on the application is— (a) to determine whether the relevant decisions of the Secretary of State are obviously flawed, and (b) to determine whether to give permission to impose measures on the individual and (where applicable) whether to exercise the power of direction under subsection (9). (4) The court may consider the application— (a) in the absence of the individual, (b) without the individual having been notified of the application, and (c) without the individual having been given an opportunity (if the individual was aware of the application) of making any representations to the court. (5) But that does not limit the matters about which rules of court may be made. (6) In determining the application, the court must apply the principles applicable on an application for judicial review. (7) In a case where the court determines that a decision of the Secretary of State that condition A, condition B or condition C is met is obviously flawed, the court may not give permission under this section. (8) In any other case, the court may give permission under this section. (9) If the court determines that the Secretary of State's decision that condition D is met is obviously flawed, the court may (in addition to giving permission under subsection (8)) give directions to the Secretary of State in relation to the measures to be imposed on the individual. (10) In this section “relevant decisions” means the decisions that the following conditions are met— (a) condition A, (b) condition B, (c) condition C, and (d) condition D.
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.