SCHEDULE 6 [Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education and Training in Wales or Prif Arolygydd Ei Mawrhydi dros Addysg a Hyfforddiant yng Nghymru]
Government of Wales Act 1998 (1998 c 38) | Legislation

SCHEDULE 6 [Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education and Training in Wales or Prif Arolygydd Ei Mawrhydi dros Addysg a Hyfforddiant yng Nghymru]

Section 104

Interpretation

1

In this Schedule—

“the Chief Inspector†means [Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education and Training in Wales or Prif Arolygydd Ei Mawrhydi dros Addysg a Hyfforddiant yng Nghymru], and

“the Office of the Chief Inspector†means the Chief Inspector and the persons who [(in accordance with section 19(3) of, and Schedule 2 to, the Education Act 2005)] are members of his staff.

Status of the Office of the Chief Inspector

2

The Secretary of State may by order provide that the Office of the Chief Inspector is, for the purposes of the enactments specified in the order, to be treated as if it were a government department.

Status of the Chief Inspector and his staff

3

(1)     Despite the provision made by section 104—

(a)     the functions of the Chief Inspector and his staff shall continue to be regarded as exercised on behalf of the Crown, and

(b)     service as a member of the Chief Inspector's staff shall continue to be service in [the civil service of

Powered by Lexis+®
 

Popular documents

LEXISNEXIS

Pension commencement lump sums (PCLSs)

Pension commencement lump sums (PCLSs)When a member of a pension scheme becomes entitled to receive their scheme benefits, they can usually take part as a tax-free lump sum. HMRC calls this a ‘pension commencement lump sum’ (PCLS). Taking a lump sum is usually at the option of the member who will

LEXISNEXIS

Proprietary estoppel

Proprietary estoppelThis Practice Note considers proprietary estoppel from a generic standpoint.For industry specific guidance on proprietary estoppel, see Practice Notes:•Estoppel and property law•Mortgages by estoppelProprietary estoppel—what is it?Unlike the other forms of estoppel (see Practice

LEXISNEXIS

Costs and the ‘without prejudice’ rule

Costs and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleCosts determination and the ‘without prejudice’ ruleAn issue for practitioners is whether correspondence marked ‘without prejudice’ can be used against a party when the court comes to determine the issue of costs. The Court of Appeal in Walker v Wilsher (1889)

LEXISNEXIS

VAT definition