Trusts 10 Purpose trusts I: public purposes
Unlock all answers in this set
Unlock answersquestion
reason for determining whether a purpose counts as charitable is extremely significant.
answer
charitable works are regarded as beneficial to society as a whole, a distribution of funds or an ongoing activity that counts as charitable is typically given preferential treatment under the law, especially in terms of the payment of taxes.
question
rules affecting the validity of a T are relaxed in the case of T for exclusively charitable objects:
answer
no Bs, AG and charities commissioners Certainty of objects rule against perpetual duration rule against remoteness of vesting, taxation
question
The beneficiary principle
answer
no Bs only enforced A-G assisted by the Charities Commissioners.
question
Certainty of objects
answer
relaxed in the case of a charitable T in the following sense: so long as it is clear that the settlor intended to devote funds to charity, it matters not whether the particular charitable purpose(s) he intended is (or are) clearly defined; the court will devise a scheme for the charitable use of the funds. So, for example, a T simply 'for charitable purposes' would be perfectly valid.
question
rule against perpetual duration
answer
charitable T may last forever; where charitable T funds remain, but the particular charitable purpose can no longer practically be carried out, the cy-près doctrine - to determine a new, workable, charitable purpose for the funds.
question
rule against remoteness of vesting
answer
rule does not apply to a gift over from one charity to another. For example, a charitable T established for a particular residential home for the blind 'so long as it is situated in Tavistock Square', and then to the Royal National Institute for the Blind, will operate so as to shift the funds to the RNIB whenever the defeating condition (i.e. the home no longer being located in Tavistock Square) occurs, and so be perfectly valid.
question
rules of taxation
answer
substantial fiscal advantages, in the form of reduction or exemption from various taxes and charges
question
why the state allows fiscal privileges to charities:benefits, save state $,but not all same kind of benefits, also large sector with eco activity=> should be taxed?
answer
Tax relief to charities is generally based upon the idea that charities provide public benefits; since they are not for the private benefit of individuals or corporations, they should not be subject to the rules of taxation which are meant to raise revenue from private individuals for the running of the state. It is also sometimes claimed that charitable works would have to be provided by the state if charities did not carry them out, so they save the state money. As you will see, however, not all charities provide the same kind of public benefits, and it is arguable that blanket tax relief for them all is not warranted. Finally, countries like the UK have a large charitable sector, which forms a substantial part of the economy, and it is sometimes argued that this economic activity should be taxed in some way, even if not in the same way as the 'for profit' sector.
question
given the existence of fiscal privileges, whether it is appropriate for courts to determine, without the benefit of a statute, which private bodies should receive relief from normal taxation
answer
forum for determining charitable status should be more democratic; judges might appropriately determine rights under the law, but they have no expertise in drawing fine distinctions between activities that are truly for the public benefit and those which might only appear to be so. Should there be some public body other than the courts which should do so?
question
whether, if fiscal privileges were withdrawn, the courts should be prepared to widen the category of valid purpose T?
answer
point here is that in view of the fiscal privileges, courts tend to be conservative about what counts as charitable, in order to prevent giving charitable tax status to activities which are not clearly for the public benefit - if tax consequences did not follow, then the courts might allow many more 'not for profit' purposes to count as charitable.
question
approach to identifying charities
answer
1. Is the purpose prima facie charitable? 2. If so, are there any elements (for example, limits on the class of persons to whom it is intended to apply) which disqualify the purpose from charitable status?
question
Is the purpose prima facie charitable?
answer
important factor in determining whether a purpose is charitable is whether it falls within the wording of the Preamble to the Statute of Charitable Uses 1601, which provides as follows: Whereas lands, tenements, rents, annuities, profits, hereditaments, goods, chattels, money and stocks of money have been heretofore given, limited, appointed and assigned, as well by the Queen's most excellent majesty, and her most noble progenitors, as by sundry other well disposed persons; some for the relief of aged, impotent and poor People, some for Maintenance of sick and maimed soldiers and Mariners, Schools of Learning, Ports, Havens, Causeways, Churches, Sea-Banks and Highways, some for Education and Preferment of Orphans, some for or towards the Relief, Stock or Maintenance of Houses of Correction, some for Marriages of poor maids, some for Supportation, Aid and help of Young Tradesmen, of Prisoners or Captives, and for Aid or Ease of any poor Inhabitants concerning payments of Fifteens, setting out Soldiers and other Taxes; which Lands, Tenements, Rents, Annuities, Profits, Hereditaments, Goods, Chattels, Money and Stocks of Money, nevertheless have not been employed according to the charitable intent of the givers and founders thereof, by reason of frauds, Breaches of T and Negligence in those that should pay, deliver and employ the same.
question
first case on the 2006 Act (now in force) The Independent Schools Council v The Charity Commission for England and Wales [2011] VIMP
answer
abolition of the so-called 'presumption' of public benefit by s.3(2) is of no effect at all, there being no such presumption in the first place. That is probably correct. More controversially, it holds that all charitable T must benefit the poor, so that an education T which provided schooling only for those who could afford high fees would not be charitable. Many charity practitioners consider this to be wrong, and a reversion to the 'lay' sense of charity (see IRC v Pemsel (1891)
question
Commissioners of Income Tax v Pemsel (1891) : 4 categories to preamble of Statute of Charitable Uses 1601 Lord McNaghton
answer
a. trusts for the relief of poverty b. trusts for the advancement of religion c. trusts for the advancement of education d. trusts for other analogous purposes within the 'spirit and intendment of the preamble'. ( not enough simply to show that the purpose confers a benefit on the public - it must also be shown that the benefit conferred is within the spirit and intendment of the preamble
question
Williams v IRC (1947) This would likely be ok under CA 2011 advancement of a community. overall objects of company were to promote Welsh interests in London. principal object of T was to create a centre in London 'for promoting moral social spiritual and Eal welfare of Welsh people and fostering study of Welsh language and of Welsh history literature music and art.' House was asked whether objects were CH.
answer
Where a gift states an express purpose, that purpose must itself be charitable; and a non-charitable purpose trust cannot be validated by localising the gift. The property was not vested in the trustees for charitable purposes only, and consequently the company was not a charitable company. Lord Simonds referred to the cases on charitable gifts to localities: 'But I would suggest that it is possible to justify as charitable a gift to 'my country England' upon the ground that, where no purpose is defined, a charitable purpose is implicit in the context; it is at least not excluded by the express prescription of 'public' purposes. in determining whether a T is charitable, the T must first be properly regarded as being within the spirit and intendment of the Preamble to the Charitable Uses Act 1601 and, secondly, that its purpose must be beneficial to the community in a way that is charitable.
question
relief of poverty
answer
provide for those who are deprived of a reasonable standard of living - the intended recipients do not have to be destitute. The recipients do actually have to be poor, however, so a T for an individual's 'poor relations' is charitable , but one for the 'working classes' (because not all those in 'the working class' are poor) is not
question
re Scarisbrick [1951] VIMP
answer
charities for the relief of poverty, are excepted from the general principle that there must not be a personal family connection or tie within the definition for the pool from which the Bs may be drawn. not withstanding the general principle that applied to the other heads of charity that a personal connection or tie would affect public benefit. (Re Compton)
question
re Sander's Will T [1954]
answer
held that money given to provide dwellings for 'the working classes and their families' was not charitable because the term 'working class' was not exclusively reserved for the poor.
question
Dingle v Turner confirms re Scarisbrick [1951]
answer
concerning a gift to pay pensions to poor employees of a family company, where Lord Cross reviewed and confirmed the poor relations cases as well as cases on poor employees. The \" . poor relations\" . and \" . poor employees\" . exceptions are well established and have been confirmed and applied by the court and by the Commission.
question
re Niyazi's Will Trusts [1978] provided that his residuary estate should be held by his Tees upon T to pay the capital and income to a local authority in a needy part of Cyprus 'on condition that the same shall be used for the purposes only of the construction of or as a contribution towards the cost of the construction of a working men's hostel'.
answer
Megarry V-C held that this was a valid charitable T for the relief of poverty. The word 'hostel' suggested a poor inhabitant. The judge also took into account the fact that the relatively modest size of the fund made it unlikely that a 'grandiose building' would be erected.
question
Niyazi's WT arguments for an against charity, implied limitation to poverty from context
answer
argument was that there was a valid charitable T for the relief of poverty. True, there was no explicit reference to poverty in the will, but there was enough in the language of clause 4 ( c ) to import an implied limitation to poverty. Mr. Knox adopted this contention, and added to it that evidence of the surrounding circumstances supported such an implied limitation. Mr. Langan, on the other hand, rejected any such implied limitation, and contended that the gift authorised the provision of a hostel which would serve the affluent as well as the poor. housing conditions in Famagusta were very difficult, with building sites very expensive, the price of building materials constantly increasing and rents very high. It also states that those likely to be attracted by a hostel run by the local authority would not be skilled craftsmen and artisans, but manual workers, with what at least appear to be modest wages even if neither \"working men\" nor \"hostel,\" by itself, could be said to confine the T to what in law was charity, the use of these expressions in conjunction sufficed for his purpose 1. \"poverty\" is not confined to destitution, but extends to those who have small means and so have to \"go short.\" 2. a gift which in terms is not confined to the relief of poverty may by inference be thus confined. 3. anything in the terms of the gift which by implication prevents it from going outside those bounds will suffice
question
Niyazi's WT Has the expression \"working mens hostel\" a sufficient connotation of poverty in it to satisfy the requirements of charity?
answer
On the whole, however, for the reasons that I have been discussing, I think that the T is charitable, though by no great margin. This view is in my judgment supported by two further considerations. First, there is the amount of the T fund, which in 1969 was a little under £15,000. I think one is entitled to assume that a testator has at least some idea of the probable value of his estate. The money is given for the purpose \"of the construction of or as a contribution towards the cost of the construction of a working mens hostel.\" £15,000 will not go very far in such a project, and it seems improbable that contributions from other sources towards constructing a \"working mens hostel\" would enable or encourage the construction of any grandiose building. If financial constraints point towards the erection of what may be called an \"economy hostel,\" decent but catering for only the more basic requirements, then only the relatively poor would be likely to be occupants. Where the T is to erect a building in a particular area, regard to the physical conditions existing in that area. erect a hostel in a slum or in an area of acute housing need may have to be construed differently from a T to erect a hostel in an rich area. Where there is a grave housing shortage, it is plain that the poor are likely to suffer more than the prosperous, and that the provision of a \"working mens hostel\" is likely to help the poor and not the rich.
question
advancement of religion
answer
law takes the general view that any religion is better than none, but is neutral as between them Neville Estates Ltd v Madden [1962]
question
Neville Estates Ltd v Madden [1962] Synagogue maintained regular sabbath and other religious services and Hebrew and religious classes. A communal hall was erected near the synagogue and social functions were held there. It was held that the purposes were charitable as being religious purposes, notwithstanding that social activities were carried on by members of the synagogue as part of its activities and that the T was for the benefit of the limited membership,
answer
.because the social activities were merely ancillary to the religious purposes, and the religious purposes had the requisite element of benefit to the public, since the members of the synagogue mixed with their fellow men and did not live secluded from the world. Gilmour v. Coats has made it clear that a T for a religious purpose must be shown to have some element of public benefit in order to qualify as a charitable T. ... The T with which I am concerned resembles that in Gilmour v. Coats in this, that the persons immediately benefited by it are not a s of the public but the members of a private body.
question
re South Place Ethical Society [1980]
answer
T for the promotion of ethical behaviour without a component of spiritual belief are not T for the advancement of religion. though such T may be charitable under the fourth head of charity. Two of the essential attributes of religion are faith and worship: faith in a god and worship of that god It would not seem to be possible to worship in this way (i.e. with reverence) a mere ethical or philosophical ideal
question
Gilmour v. Coats
answer
some benefit accrues to the public from attendance at places of worship of persons who live in this world and mix with their fellow citizens\" . . Notably, this excludes gifts to groups which do not associate with the public,
question
characteristics of a religion
answer
faith in a god and worship of that god re South Place Ethical Society [1980] : Worship must have at least some of the following characteristics: submission to the object worshipped, veneration of that object, praise, thanksgiving, prayer or intercession - Segerdal must be a promotion of the religion, meaning \"the promotion of spiritual teaching in a wide sense, and the maintenance of the doctrines on which it rests, and the observances that serve to promote and manifest it.\" - Keren Kayemeth Le Jisroel v IRC (Lord Hanworth MR). This would include observance of particular common standards, practices or codes of conduct as stipulated in particular scriptures or teachings Promotion of religion includes a missionary element or other charitable work through which the beliefs of the religion are advanced - United Grand Lodge v Holborn BC Public benefit is a necessary element in religious T as it is in other charitable T - Re Coats's T, Coats v Gilmour [1948]
question
Charities Act 2006 (s2 (2) (c)) 'the advancement of religion religion
answer
a religion which involves belief in more than one god, and (ii) a religion which does not involve belief in a god.
question
R v Registrar General e. p. Segerdal Scientology Segerdal description of use of chapel and functions
answer
He describes himself as a minister of the Church of Scientology. He exhibits the creeds. He gives a description of what takes place at this building. On Sunday afternoons they have a service at 3.00 p.m., which is attended by a congregation of 150 to 200 persons. There is a welcoming address from the chaplain. He then reads one or other of the creeds. He delivers a sermon, covering some aspect of Scientology. After the sermon there is a moment's silence for contemplation or prayer. He gives out notices of what is to take place during the week. In addition to the Sunday afternoon service, Mr Segerdal says that there are other religious ceremonies at the chapel, such as christenings, funeral services and wedding ceremonies. He says that the chapel is also open at other times for private prayer and meditation.
question
e. p. Segerdal Denning governing idea behind the words 'place of meeting for religious worship'
answer
should be a place for the worship of God. I am sure that would be the meaning attached by those who framed this legislation of 1855 . Places of Religious Worship Registration Act
question
e. p. Segerdal Denning : why does Scientology seem not to be a religion
answer
I must say that it seems to me to be more a philosophy of the existence of man or of life, rather than a religion. Religious worship means reverence or veneration of God or of a supreme being. I do not find any such reverence or veneration in the creed of this church, or, indeed, in the affidavit of Mr. Segerdal. There is considerable stress on the spirit of man. The adherents of this philosophy believe that man's spirit is everlasting and moves from one human frame to another; but still, so far as I can see, it is the spirit of man and not of God. When I look through the ceremonies and the affidavits, I am left with the feeling that there is nothing in it of reverence for God or a deity, but simply instruction in a philosophy. There may be belief in a spirit of man, but there is no belief in a spirit of God. This is borne out by the opening words of the book of ceremonies. It states: 'In a Scientology Church Service we do not use prayers, attitudes of piety, or threats of damnation. We use the facts, the truths, the understandings that have been discovered in the science of Scientology.' word 'prayer' he does not use it in its proper sense, i.e. intercession to God. When the creed uses the word 'God' (as it does in two places) it does not use it in any religious sense. There is nothing which carries with it any idea of reverence or veneration of God. The sample sermon has no word of God in it at all.
question
advancement of education
answer
covering research, the dissemination of useful knowledge as well as schools uni
question
advancement of education cases
answer
dissemination of useful knowledge (Incorporated Council of Law Reporting v A-G [1972] artistic education (Royal Choral Society v IRC [1943] museums :British Museum Trustees v White promotion of culture (re Delius [1957] Ch 299) school sports facilities (re Mariette [1915] 2 Ch 284) activities associated with education such as student unions (London Hospital Medical College v IRC [1976] professional bodies that advance education (Royal College of Surgeons of England v National Provincial Bank Ltd [1952]
question
re Hopkinson [1949]
answer
courts are careful to ensure that this head is not used to provide charitable status for political purposes masquerading as education, research, or the dissemination of knowledge, such as the production and publication of propaganda or party political literature
question
(re Koeppler Will Trusts [1986]
answer
mere fact that research, education, or the dissemination of knowledge concerns politically controversial issues does not disqualify it from charitable status
question
re Shaw [1957] left money on T for research into the development of a 40-letter alphabet for English.
answer
held, narrowly, not to create a valid charitable T. In general, research and scholarly organizations can be valid charities, falling within the 'advancement of education' category of pemsels case (1891). However, Shaw seems to have failed because the didactic benefits of his project were not entirely clear. What does seem clear, however, is that heard on a different day by different judges, the decision might have gone the other way. Education: excluded schools for pickpockets or prostitutes.
question
re Hopkins' Will T [1965] A gift to a society to encourage the general study of the evidence in favour of Francis Bacon's authorship of the plays commonly ascribed to Shakespeare
answer
held charitable \"education\" ..... must be used in a wide sense, certainly extending beyond teaching .... the requirement is that, in order to be charitable, research must either be of educational value to the researcher or must be so directed as to lead to something which will pass into the store of educational material, or so as to improve the sum of communicable knowledge in an area which education may cover—education in this last context extending to the formation of literary taste and appreciation what constitutes education is not static, what is or is not an educational purpose in contemporary circumstances to consider what parliament considered educational in the then current Education legislation setting out the statutory state system of education, and the duties of the local education authorities and the government in establishing and maintaining the system.
question
cd re Shaw [1957] and Hopkins
answer
It is very difficult to distinguish these 'research' cases, since it is not clear that Shaw's purpose was less beneficial to the public than research to show that Bacon was the author of Shakespeare's plays.
question
cat 4: Other purposes beneficial to the community. reference is most often made to the Preamble of the 1601 Act.
answer
a T is not charitable merely because it benefits some s of the public. '[I]t is not enough to say that the T in question is for public purposes beneficial to the community; you must also show it to be a charitable T' A-G v National Provincial and Union Bank of England [1924] must be for their benefit in a way which can be related to the purposes set out in the Preamble or to purposes which later courts have found to be analogous to those in the Preamble.
question
Other purposes : re Lewis [1955] re Fraser (1883)
answer
'relief of aged, impotent and poor' people is construed disjunctively; that is, a T can be for the aged OR the impotent OR the poor and be valid - it need not be for people with all three misfortunes. 'Impotent' provides an explicit basis for T for the disabled and for trusts for hospitals generally.
question
other purposes: Disaster relief trusts re North Devon and West Somerset Relief Fund Trusts [1953]
answer
trusts for the relief of victims of disasters are charitable only to the extent they provide benefits to the ill or disabled or relieve victims of poverty.
question
re Nottage [1895] cf Hadden
answer
T for sport or recreation outside of the education context are not charitable
question
re Hadden [1932]
answer
provision of public facilities which can be used for recreation is charitable
question
Guild v IRC (1992)
answer
does not matter if the rich benefit from the recreational facility as well as the poor or deprived, so long as it is genuinely open to all members or all female members of the public
question
Williams' Trustees v IRC [1947] A gift on T to establish and maintain an institute, to be known as the 'London Welsh Association', the purposes of which included maintaining an institute for the benefit of Welsh people in London, and promoting their language and culture - overall objects of the company were to promote Welsh interests in London. The principal object of the trust was to create a centre in London
answer
Where a gift states an express purpose, that purpose must itself be charitable; and a non-charitable purpose T cannot be validated by localising the gift. The property was not vested in the Tees for charitable purposes only, and consequently the company was not a charitable company.
question
The work of the National T for Places of Historic Interest or Natural Beauty - re Verrall [1916] promoting the permanent preservation \"for the benefit of the nation\" of lands and tenements (including buildings) *101 of beauty or historic interest, and as regards lands for the preservation (so far as possible) of their natural aspect, features, and animal and plant life:—
answer
held: charitable Tees are strictly limited to the specific objects and purposes referred to in the Act, which are plainly public purposes, expressly stated to be for the benefit of the nation, and have no choice of applying them to any other purposes as in In re Macduff For these reasons it seems to me the objects and purposes of this society are plainly within the judgments of the House of Lords in Pemsel's Case
question
McDuff example of not all public trusts for benefit public does not imply charitable
answer
held: A bequest of money \"for some one or more purposes, charitable, philanthropic or.....,\" is not bad simply by reason of the existence of the blank, but must be treated as one \"for charitable or philanthropic purposes.\" Such a bequest, however, is not a good charitable bequest, as there may be philanthropic purposes which are not charitable. philanthropy is benevolence towards the whole of mankind. There is no decision as to whether or not a gift for philanthropic purposes is a good charitable gift;
question
Thatam v Drummond (1864) work of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
answer
held charitable
question
A gift for an animal sanctuary which specifically excluded humans so that the animals would not be molested re Grove-Grady [1929]
answer
held not charitable, but would be different under charities 2006 Act s(2)(k)
question
A T for the purpose of promoting athletic sports and general pastimes for the Glasgow police - IRC v City of Glasgow Police Athletic Association [1953] exclusively charitable requirement
answer
House of Lords decided that a gift to the City of Glasgow Police Athletic Association was not charitable on the grounds the charitable purpose namely, improving the efficiency of the Police Force, was purely incidental to the non-charitable purpose of providing recreational activities for members of the force.
question
provision of facilities for religious services and instruction and for the social and physical training and recreation of persons who would otherwise be deprived of these services and who were or were likely to become members of the Methodist Church - IRC v Baddeley [1955]
answer
held that recreation for a restricted class of people in a specific geographical area would not be charitable, the Recreational Charities Act 1958 was introduced to bring such purposes within the head of charity. The 1958 Act established a 'public benefit test' to legitimize recreational charities as charitable T. However, the facilities must be provided with the intention of improving the conditions of life for the people benefiting. Those persons must have a need of those facilities or that the facilities will be available to the public at large.
question
public benefit requirement
answer
as the first three heads are concerned, there is often said to be a 'presumption' of public benefit. What seems to be meant by this is that it need not be shown how the particular purpose benefits the public, provided only that there is a sufficient element of the public who are 'benefited'. no such 'presumption' operates in relation to the fourth head
question
National Anti-Vivis Society v IRC [1948]
answer
House of Lords held it imperative to decide whether the benefits to human beings of suppressing vivisection outweighed the benefits to medical science and research that depended on it. balance of benefit against detriment may then become an issue. failed to establish that its activities could be funded by acharitable trust. Bearing in mind that, in law, animals cannot be the recipients of charity, they expressed their objectives in terms of the education benefits that would accrue to society in general. Clearly informing the public about issues surrounding animal experimentation is education, but the House decided that the Society was not charitable because the cost of its activities to society at large outweighed the benefits to its supporters.
question
re Foveaux as criticized in National Anti-Vivis Society v IRC [1948]
answer
In my opinion In re Foveaux (supra) was wrongly decided and should now be reversed. Chitty J. was wrong in taking the intention of the donor as a sufficient test that the gift was charitable. That is vital. He was wrong in holding that he could stand neutral and not decide, on the facts before him, the question whether the gift was for the public benefit. If he stood neutral he could not decide in favour of one side and against the other side. He was inconsistent in holding that the gift was charitable while at the same time refusing to decide whether it was for the public benefit: unless he so decided in favour of the gift he could not decide that it was charitable. If he was not satisfied that the propaganda and expenditure for the suppression of vivis were beneficial to the com- munity, he could not hold that the activities of the Society were charitable. He was also wrong in deciding that he could not weigh against each other the detriment inseparable from suppressing vivis on the one hand and on the other hand the benefit to the community of higher moral standards said to be due to enhanced regard for the wellbeing of animals. There is not, so far as I can see, any difficulty in weighing the relative value of what it called the material benefits of vivis against the moral benefit which is alleged or assumed as possibly following from the success of the appellant's project. In any case the position must be judged \" . as a whole.
question
4 heads and presumptions a. trusts for the relief of poverty b. trusts for the advancement of religion c. trusts for the advancement of education d. trusts for other analogous purposes within the 'spirit and intendment of the preamble'.
answer
A charitable purpose must be beneficial to the public, not detrimental. So far as the first three heads are concerned, there is often said to be a 'presumption' of public benefit. What seems to be meant by this is that it need not be shown how the particular purpose benefits the public, provided only that there is a sufficient element of the public who are 'benefited' no such 'presumption' operates in relation to the fourth head, and here it must be shown how those who are 'benefited' actually benefit. All four heads, however, are subject to the requirement that it be shown that as of the public receives the 'benefit', and no 'presumptions' operate here. That said, as respects T for the relief of poverty, this requirement seems to be non-existent
question
re Scarisbrick (1951): public receiving benefit, poverty, EXCEPTION for poverty
answer
T for one's poor relations is valid (re Scarisbrick (1951)) even though only a private class. NOTE: Re Compton, education for descendants of named Bs, invalid, also Oppenheim for children of employees or former employees, NOT CH
question
Neville Estates Ltd v Madden : public receiving benefit, religion
answer
holds that the court will assume that 'some benefit accrues to the public from the attendance at places of worship of persons who live in this world and mix with their fellow citizens.' However, if there is no engagement with the public, for example in the case of a contemplative order of nuns, there is no public benefit (Gilmour v Coats [1949]
question
trusts for the advancement of education, public receiving benefit is more important
answer
fee- charging schools and hospitals are charitable, even though only those who can afford the fees can use them, so long as they are not profit-distributing. T for the education of C of one locality, such as university scholarships for C of Yorkshire, are valid; however, T restricted to C of a family or particular company are not, in particular where the 'educational T' really amounts to a fringe benefit for employees , though this requirement gives rise to some difficult decisions for the courts (see, for example, Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities T Co Ltd [1951] AC 297).
question
re Koettgen's Will Trusts [1954] a trust for education of British born citizens with preference to employees of the company
answer
held: preference was for permitting, not obliging, suggests, against the usual principles, that where a beneficial class is a public class which is subject to a preference for a private class, this preference does not prevent a purpose for its benefit from being charitable. This potential
question
IRC v Educational Grants Association refusd to follow re Koettgen's Will Trusts [1954]
answer
holding that the actual application of a very high percentage of income for the benefit of a preferred class was not a charitable application of assets. Generally cases now concern educational charities with objects for the benefit of a wide public class with a preference, which is sometimes a mandatory preference, for a class which standing by itself would not be a public class. Whether or not a class is a public class will be assessed by considering whether it is shown that the assets must in fact be applied for educational purposes for the public benefit (a single test, as is now clearly the case under the Charities Act 2006).
question
Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities Trust Co Ltd [1951] VIMP, nexus TEST
answer
The trust was not charitable. The nexus, that of being employment by particular employers, did not satisfy the test of public benefit to establish the trust as a charitable trust. Lord Simonds said: \"The question is whether that class of persons can be regarded as such a 'section of the community' as to satisfy the test of public benefit. These words 'section of the community' have no special sanctity, but they conveniently indicate first, that the possible (I emphasize the word 'possible') beneficiaries must not be numerically negligible, and secondly, that the quality which distinguishes them from other members of the community, so that they form by themselves a section of it, must be a quality which does not depend on their relationship to a particular individual. It is for this reason that a trust for the education of members of a family or, as in In re Compton [1945] Ch 123, of a number of families cannot be regarded as charitable. A group of persons may be numerous but, if the nexus between them is their personal relationship to a single propositus or to several they are neither the community nor a section of the community for charitable purposes.\" He remarked that whilst the law of charity is pervaded with illogicalities: \"It must not, I think, be forgotten that charitable institutions enjoy rare and increasing privileges, and that the claim to come within that privileged class should be clearly established. he fact that society generally may benefit from a well educated person did not save as charitable for the benefit of the public what was otherwise an educational purpose directly benefiting an insufficient s of the public. a T established by a father for the education of his son is not a charity. The public element, as I will call it, is not supplied by the fact that from that son's education all may benefit
question
re Hummeltenberg [1923] A gift to train spiritual mediums
answer
court decided that a gift for the training of Spiritualist mediums was not charitable. However, in that case it was contended that the gift was charitable either as being for the advancement of education or as being otherwise beneficial to the public. No evidence was produced to support the alleged beneficial nature of the gift and the court held that it was not charitable under either head.
question
A T to campaign for the release of prisoners of conscience in foreign countries (McGovern v A-G [1982] illustrates the difficulties of obtaining charitable status for an organization which has politcal objectives, as well as more overtly charitable ones. The case concerned an attempt by Amnesty International to set up acharitable T to promote its objectives which were, and are, to secure the release of 'prisoners of conscience', to abolish the practice of torture and other human and degrading practises, and to undertake research into the maintenance of human rights.
answer
failed, not because these goals are not worthy ones, but because they are not entirely charitable. For example, one of the objectives supported by Amnesty was to bring about changes in the law in foreign states. This objective cannot easily be brought within any of the generally recognized categories of charity as the law presently stands. Moreover, and this may be more influential, it is the job of the government of the day to support and protect the interests of registered charities. It could easily be embarrassing for the government if it supported foreign policy objectives that were at odds with those of charities it supported.
question
Contaminating non-charitable elements
answer
Political purposes are not charitable. Profit making/profit distribution:Charities may charge for the benefits they confer, as in the case of private hospitals and non-state schools, and charities may engage in fund-raising activities which themselves make a profit, so long as the profit is turned to the charities' purposes and not distributed to private individuals.
question
McGovern political purposes (5) political party, change laws, revers gov policy or decision in UK or other country.
answer
[T]rusts of which a direct and principal purpose is either (i) to further political party; (ii) change laws of this country; or (iii) foreign country (iv) to procure a reversal of government policy or of particular decisions of governmental authorities in this country; or (v) foreign country.
question
McGovern allowable political activities
answer
the same body that makes day-to-day decisions not pertaining to government policy or government decisions or undertakes other policy matters outside their agency role should not fall within the rules. So any attempt by a charity to seek a change in these latter policies or decisions will not properly constitute a political act under the McGovern definition. charity commissioners have suggested that an organization may supply information to the government regarding changes in the law without forfeiting its charitable status.
question
cy-près doctrine
answer
Where a valid charitable purpose would fail because the means chosen by a testator for carrying out the charitable purpose are impractical or impossible, the court will apply the judicially developed cy-près only available where the original T is for a valid charitable purpose. e.g. if not charitable e.g. political, than invalid trust=> resulting T
question
cy-près s.13 Charities Act 1993.
answer
These powers allow the court to order the T fund to be applied to a different but similar purpose.
question
If failure has occurred
answer
necessary to decide when that failure occurred. If it was an initial failure, the rights will go on automatic resulting T unless the donor had a general, or paramount, charitable intent. But once rights have been 'dedicated to charity', in other words, in a case of subsequent failure, cy-près is available regardless of the presence or absence of any 'general charitable intent', unless, of course, there was in the gift a specific gift over to take effect in the event of failure of the initial gift.
question
Bill dies, leaving by his will funds on trust 'for the Bermondsey Home for the Aged'. if there never existed a Bermondsey Home for the Aged or any similarly named institution
answer
The question here is whether a general charitable intent is disclosed - re Harwood suggests that it is easier to find a general charitable intent when the named charity never existed than when it once did but is now defunct, on the basis that in the former case the testator's intention is more general, the specific location not mattering so much to him (otherwise he would have taken more care in naming an actual charitable institution). Do you find this reasoning persuasive?
question
Bill dies, leaving by his will funds on trust 'for the Bermondsey Home for the Aged'. if a Bermondsey Home for the Aged existed until 1991, but its work was taken over by the local NHS hospital
answer
not a case of cy-près. If one charitable institution's work is continued by another, the gift goes to the continuing institution as a fulfilment of the testator's intention, unless there is some indication that the testator would not have favoured this.
question
Bill dies, leaving by his will funds on trust 'for the Bermondsey Home for the Aged'. if the Bermondsey Home for the Aged is the name of a charitable company which no longer operates a home but provides care in the community for the elderly.
answer
might not be a case of cy-près. According to re Vernon WT, a gift to a charitable company ought normally to be construed as a gift to the company directly, to carry out whatever charitable activities it does. This reasoning does not seem entirely persuasive, and in appropriate cases one might construe the gift as being for the named charitable purpose, treating it as having failed, and then assessing whether there was a general charitable intent to allow the gift to be applied cy-près.
question
re Farakar [1912] VIMP cy-près attention is first turned to the wording of the T instrument. The terms of such documents are taken literally; if a particular organisation or purpose is given, the settlor's intention is considered to be no wider or narrower than this. A different approach is used when dealing with cases like Re Faraker,[13] which dealt with a situation where the charity named in the gift had been amalgamated with others.
answer
held that the amalgamated charities were entitled to the gift, since the charity named effectively continued as part of the amalgamated one. Farwell LJ wrote that \" . in all these cases one has to consider not so much the means to the end as the charitable end which is in view, and so long as the charitable end is well established the means are only machinery, and no alteration of the machinery can destroy the charitable T for the benefit of which the machinery is provided
question
re Vernon's Will Trusts [1972]cy-près
answer
where a gift is made to a charity for its purposes, rather than for the particular institution itself, it may be held that, if that purpose is being continued by another body, that body should receive the charitable gift by way of a scheme. In the case of unincorporated associations, the gift will usually (unless the construction indicates otherwise) be construed by the Court as a gift for a charitable purpose: However, if a Court deems a gift to be to a specific institution, the gift will lapse if that institution is no longer in existence.
question
re Finger's Will T [1972] cy-près testamentary gifts were made to the National Radium Commission, an unincorporated association, and to the National Council for Maternity and Child Welfare, which was a corporate charity. Both had ceased to exist by the time the testatrix died. cf Re Koeppler's WT [1986] Ch. 423, where Slade L.J. construed a gift to a non-existent body as a valid trust for educational purposes. The case concerned the validity of a testamentary gift to the warden of the institution known as Wilton Park. At the time of the testator's death there was no entity called Wilton Park, nor was there a warden of Wilton Park, but there was a Wilton Park project, which organised a series of conferences. The gift was construed as a gift for the purposes of the Wilton Park project, the non-existent body in Re Koeppler's WT being treated as analogous to the National Radium Commission in Re Finger's WT.
answer
held that the gift to the National Radium Commission was interpreted as a gift to its purposes, and since these still continued, the gift did not fail. It seems to have been assumed that a gift to a charitable unincorporated association must be a gift to its purposes - presumably the Neville Estates reasoning that applies to non-charitable associations does not apply to charities, since it would imply that the members had beneficial ownership of the association's property. The gift to the National Council for Maternity and Child Welfare would have failed, as a gift to a corporate charity, in the absence of a general charitable intention, which in the event it was however possible to discern. Goff J distinguished Re Harwood and held that the will before him displayed a general charitable intention. He did this on the footing that the circumstances of the case were `very special'. The gift that failed was a gift to an incorporated charity which had ceased to exist before the testatrix died. The `very special' circumstances were, first, that apart from a life interest and two small legacies, the whole estate was devoted to charity, and that this was emphasised by the direction to hold the residue in trust for division `between the following charitable institutions and funds'. Second, the charitable donee that had ceased to exist was mainly, if not exclusively, a co-ordinating body, and the judge could not believe that the testatrix meant to benefit that body alone. Third, there was evidence that the testatrix regarded herself as having no relatives.
question
re ARMS (Multiple Sclerosis research) Ltd [1997] cy-près
answer
a charity went into liquidation and several testators had left it legacies. The Court held that where the Deceased died after the winding up order but before formal dissolution, the charity still existed at the Deceased's death. Therefore the legacies had to be paid to the liquidator. Therefore consideration should be given to giving executors a discretion where a charity is subject to a winding up order at the date of death but not formally dissolved, to allow them the option to apply the gift for charitable purposes.
question
re Harwood [1936] gift to charity which never existed VIMP
answer
a gift was made to the Peace Society of Belfast which had never existed. It was held that the gift could be used for charitable purposes under a scheme under the Cy pres doctrine. Because it had never existed then the donor was clearly happy to give to the purpose rather than the specific institution and so it was treated as being a general charitable intent. A further gift was made to the Wisbech Peace Society which had ceased to exist and failed because it was for that organisation alone and since that had now ceased to exist the gift lapsed.
question
re Spence [1979]
answer
English courts can be quite strict and refuse to exercise their cy-près jurisdiction such as in when it was declined because one of the B-charity identified in the will had changed substantially by the time of the settlor's death.
question
Proposals for reform scope
answer
present scope of 'charity' automatic fiscal benefits of charitable status
question
present scope of 'charity'
answer
has been criticised as uncertain and out of date. Proposed reforms have included enacting a statutory definition of charity, or the creation of a less conservative body than the courts to determine the charitable status of novel purposes. Reform in this area would need to be concerned with the consequences for any present charities which lose their charitable status as the result of any reform.
question
automatic fiscal benefits of charitable status
answer
The concern here is that with the broad scope of charity currently in place, it follows that not all charitable purposes are equally deserving of the fiscal advantages which charitable status confers. Proposals include abolishing special tax privileges for charities and replacing these with direct government grants to those charities which serve more important or vital public services
question
concerning with moving from tax benefits to grants
answer
1. reduce the independence of charities from the government of the day, causing them to tailor their activities to please the government 2. inevitably involve charities devoting a greater portion of their funds and time to political activity, such as lobbying for grants.
question
Charities Act 2006 s.2 extends the fourfold categorisation in Pemsel to 12, though some of this is little more than a codification of earlier decisions on the fourth head.
answer
(a) the prevention or relief of poverty; (b) the advancement of education; (c) the advancement of religion; (d) the advancement of health or the saving of lives; (e) the advancement of citizenship or community development; (f) the advancement of the arts, culture, heritage or science; (g) the advancement of amateur sport; (h) the advancement of human rights, conflict resolution or reconciliation or the promotion of religious or racial harmony or equality and diversity; (i) the advancement of environmental protection or improvement; (j) the relief of those in need by reason of youth, age, ill-health, disability, financial hardship or other disadvantage; (k) the advancement of animal welfare;
question
Charities Act 2006 s3 public benefit test
answer
a purpose falling within section 2(2) must be for the public benefit if it is to be a charitable purpose. (2) In determining whether that requirement is satisfied in relation to any such purpose, it is not to be presumed that a purpose of a particular description is for the public benefit. In this Part any reference to the public benefit is a reference to the public benefit as that term is understood for the purposes of the law relating to charities in England and Wales. attempts to abolish the so-called CL 'presumption' that in the first three Pemsel heads it is unnecessary to show how the particular purpose is beneficial, so long as it affects a sufficient cross-section of society. It is not entirely clear what the abolition of this 'presumption' actually entails. Take again a T which advances religion, say a T for the saying of masses in public. How is one to demonstrate that the public's attendance at mass is something which is of benefit to the public? Are such things even susceptible of proof?
question
'To finance opposition to a proposed motorway through the Peak District which I regard as an area of outstanding beauty.'
answer
Not charitable - clearly political.
question
To support the public school education of children of employees of the British Steel Corporation, with preference to families in needy circumstances
answer
Probably not charitable, for failing the public benefit test because of the restrictions to children of the corporation - the preference may possibly save it - IRC v Educational Grants Association Ltd.
question
To support a Marxist association in its research designed to prove that God does not exist and in campaigning against religion
answer
Almost certainly not charitable as actually being against religion, and perhaps political as well, despite the fact that the research, if it could be carried out, would be enormously significant.
question
To the research unit of the Conservative Party for the advancement of learning in economic policy and electoral reform.
answer
The actual educational purpose is charitable, but is almost certainly tainted by the association with a political party; the court would probably rightly fear that this amounted to propaganda masquerading as education.
question
To finance the provision of new squash courts at London University that are to be open for use by members of the local police force as well as by members of the university.'
answer
If restricted to students, this would almost certainly be charitable, but see IRC v City of Glasgow Police Athletic Association.
question
To provide refurbishment funds for the Our Lady of Forest Hill Hospital' (a private hospital that is run by a religious order and charges fees).
answer
charitable
question
At such times and in such manner as my Tees in their absolute discretion think fit for the benefit of any of my relatives who, in the opinion of my Tees, lack ordinary comforts.
answer
May perhaps be charitable - the restriction to relatives does not violate the public benefit test (re Scarisbrick); the question is whether 'lacking ordinary comforts' amounts to poverty.
question
To campaign for the abolition of torture, capital punishment and corporal punishment
answer
Not charitable, for being a political purpose; see A-G v McGovern.
question
Scottish Burial Reform and Cremation Society v Glasgow Corporation Need for a flexible legal framework growth by analogy Money left for cremation of bodies rather than burial. found to be charitable wilberforce conclusions
answer
court's decisions \" . have to keep the law as to charities moving according as new ideas arise or old ones become obsolete or satisfied.\" categorised as an activity of public utility • Either argue by analogy from the Statute or as in this case make a case for public utility • It fit within the burials, churches and maintenance of graves etc always considered charitable in statute. So by analogy, doing it in hygienic way is considered charitable. • Wilberforce LJ says can read statute generously \"The purposes in question, to be charitable, must be shown to be for the benefit of the public or the community in a sense or in a manner within the intendment of the preamble to the statute 43 Eliz 1c4. The latter requirement does not mean quite what it says; for it is now accepted that what must be regarded is not the wording of the preamble itself, but the effect of decisions given by the courts as to its scope, decisions which have endeavoured to keep the law as to charities moving according as new social needs arise or old ones become obsolete or satisfied\"
question
Scottish Burial Reform and Cremation Society v Glasgow Corporation objections from Upjohn
answer
The authorities show that the 'spirit and intendment' of the preamble to the Statute of Elizabeth have been stretched almost to breaking point. In the 19th and 20th centuries this was often due to a desire on the part of the courts to save the intentions of the settlor or testator from failure ...Now that is used so frequently to avoid the common man's liability to rates or taxes, this generous trend in the law may one day require reconsideration.\"
question
The courts are increasingly setting out the underlying principles when deciding cases on charitable status and providing guidelines for future cases. The analysis, by Slade J. in McGovern v Att.-Gen.2 (2 [1982] Ch. 321.) of the rules relating to political purposes is an example of this approach.
answer
it was obvious that the primary activity contemplated by clause B was the imposition of\" . moral pressure on governments or governmental authorities\" . outside the United Kingdom. Although he recognized that a T to be executed outside the United Kingdom could be charitable, a T to exert pressure on foreign governments was not, because the court had no sufficient means of\" . satisfactorily judging as a matter of evidence whether the proposed reversal would be beneficial to the community in the relevant sense, after all its consequences, local and international, had been taken into account\" . . Sc Despite the learned judge's reference to \" . judging as a matter of evidence\" . , his reasoning suggests that the problem is as much one of standards as of evidence. In his view, a T of which a direct and main object is to secure a change in the law of a foreign country(or of England) can never be regarded as charitable under English law what standards are the courts to apply and to whom should they listen?
question
Incorporated Council of Law reporting for England and Wales v A-G
answer
suggested that when a purpose is beneficial to the community, it raises the presumption of a T; then the question is whether there are any grounds for holding it to be outside the scope of the 1601 statute. The approach has not been widely followed. Therefore it seems that there is merit in Lord Reid's more constrained interpretation in Scottish Burial Reform and Cremation Society Ltd v Glasgow Corporation
question
Disjunctive and Conjunctive Language:
answer
On the construction of the clause, the courts may decide that the word \"or\" ought to be interpreted disjunctively and the word \"and\" conjunctively. Where disjunctive language is used, the charity is likely to fail. For example, in a T for \"charitable or benevolent purposes,\"42 it is up to the Tee to devote the funds to charitable purposes or to benevolent purposes that are not charitable; the T would therefore fail. However, where conjunctive language is used, such as a T for \"charitable and benevolent purposes,\" the gift will be valid for benevolent purposes that are charitable. This was held in Re Best.
question
re Lysaght (1966) VIMP gift to the Royal College or Surgeons, condition => not go to a practitioner of the Jewish or Roman Catholic religions. RCS, refused the gift. Court exercised its power to strike out the restriction, making the gift acceptable.
answer
case demonstrates the considerable power the courts have to modify a charitable gift under the doctrine of cy pres. While it is generally accepted that there is a power to divert a charitable gift to different Tees if the intended gift fails, this case shows a modification of the terms of the donation itself, which is a somewhat different matter. While it is clearly undesirable that a charitable gift fail for want of a worthy B or a competent Tee, it is doubtful that the courts here were giving effect to the testator's 'paramount charitable intention'.
question
providing scholarships to assist students to learn ballroom dancing while at university, with the condition that the Tees may, in applying up to 75 per cent of the income of the T, give preference to children of employees of Capezio Ltd.
answer
While learning ballroom dancing may not appear to be particularly educational, such an activity could easily be regarded as ancillary to university education, and therefore a charitable purpose. However, the preference may well render the T non-charitable (re Koettgen's WT (1954), IRC v Educational Grants Association Ltd (1967)).
question
campaigning for a modern national health service in Ishmaliland, a country plagued by poverty and disease, where there are strong religious objections to medical procedures which involve any invasion of the body, such as surgery or vaccination by syringe.
answer
would probably fail to be a valid charitable purpose, being tainted by politics under McGovern v A-G (1982) principles, even though the provision of healthcare in a poor country would count as charitable
question
supporting the work of Osiris, a cult whose way of life and philosophy is based on an interpretation of ancient Egyptian supernatural beliefs, and whose doctrines require adherents to cut themselves off entirely from their families and retire to Osirian communities, where they make themselves available several times each month to discuss their faith with members of the public.
answer
Whether Osiris's work is charitable under the head of religion will depend upon whether their way of life is 'religious', involving belief in a higher power, or merely moral or philosophical (re South Place Ethical Society (1980), R v Registrar-General (1970)) and whether the extensive isolation of their members removes any public benefit (Neville Estates v Madden (1962)).
question
providing funds to the Sisters of 2001, an association of Roman Catholic nuns whose sole activity is to persuade the Vatican to allow the ordination of women priests.
answer
While this purpose is situated within a religious context, it is not clear that the activity is itself religious or a matter of church politics. As the Vatican is an independent state, the T may raise some McGovern v A-G (1982) issues concerning politics. On the other hand, the purpose may be regarded as educational in the sense that it provides for the discussion of Church doctrine, although again the dissemination of research or activity which is organised to promote one side of a debate would appear to fail as charitable research.
question
'£10,000,000 to my Tees upon T for the purpose of setting up an Olympic Sporting Institute, for the better training of Great Britain's most promising young amateur athletes.'
answer
This concerns the apparent prohibition on T for sporting activity not associated with traditional education (re Nottage (1895), the Birchfield Harriers decision by the Charities Commissioners (Annual Report, 1989); this might appear unjustifiable if there is a public interest in Britain's achieving international sporting excellence; one might try to fit the 'training of Britain's most promising young athletes' under the education head, but this may seem somewhat strained given that the proposed institute is independent of any regular educational institution; the T will not be validated under the Recreational Charities Act 1958, since this institute will not serve social welfare by improving the conditions of life of the athletes, and is not open to the public.
question
'£1,000,000 for the provision of condoms and other means of birth control to students in schools in London.'
answer
Concerns public benefit and possible public detriment; sex education might be education, but the mere provision of means of birth control is not; it might advance the health of students to the extent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases are avoided; however, some might regard it as encouraging sex amongst the young, which is not universally regarded as beneficial
question
re Nottage (1895),
answer
a bequest to the Yacht Racing Association of Great Britain was not charitable. 1 The bequest in that case was held to be primarily calculated to amuse individuals apart from the community at large and was not within the spirit and intendment of the Preamble to the Statute of Elizabet. has provided authority for 'mere sport' not being charitable
question
the Birchfield Harriers decision by the Charities Commissioners
answer
notes that there was (quoted in Smith, \" . Charity and a question of sport\" . , page 140) \" . a 'thin but discernable line' between gifts whose main purpose was to improve the health and welfare of the public at large by the provision of recreational facilities for the community as in Re Hadden and gifts whose main purpose was to encourage competitive sport for the benefit of the spectators or the enjoyment of the participants.\" . \" . the Birchfield Harriers had restricted membership, and the main emphasis was on competitive sport: registration as a charity was refused.
question
RECDEV: public benefit requirement Independent Schools Council v CH Commission for England and Wales 2011
answer
abolition of so‐called 'PS' of public benefit by s.32 is of no effect at all, there being no such PS in first place. That is probably correct. More controversially, it holds at 178 that 'a T which excludes poor from benefit cannot be a CH.' Therefore, a T which provided schooling only for those who could afford high fees would not be CH.
question
Catholic Care Diocese of Leeds v CH Commission for England and Wales 2010 CA 2006 Roman Catholic CH that provided adoption services for 'hard to place' children, but would not place them with same‐sex couples, contrary to Equality Act Sexual Orientation Regulations 2007. Of particular interest are comments of Briggs J at 67 on public benefit requirement in s.3 now s.4 of Charities Act 2011:
answer
For present purposes, important point which emerges from section 3 is that, although general CH law which is by no means entirely statutory is primary source for understanding of meaning of public benefit, it is no longer to be presumed that any particular type of purpose is for public benefit. Section 3 therefore expressly contemplates that purposes commonly regarded as CH, such as advancement of R or E, relief of sickness or poverty, or care of children in need, may not be for public benefit, for example if they are sought to be achieved in a particular manner. It therefore admits of possibility that question whether a particular purpose which is within section 22 is CH may require a weighing of public benefits and dis‐benefits associated with its implementation.' must be weighed also against ECHR 14 (discrimination). CH failed,.
question
CA 2011 s61
answer
\"whether less favourable treatment contemplated by proposed amendment to CH's objects clause would constitute a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, so that less favourable treatment would be justified for purposes of Article 14 [discrimination] of European Convention on Human Rs\"
question
Rec DEV CA 2011
answer
key provisions of Recreational Charities Act 1958 are now found in s.5 of 2011 Act, and it now permits single-sex facilities restricted to either female or male members of public; (c) cy près provisions formerly in s.13 of Charities Act 1993 are now in s.62 of 2011 Act.
question
Charity Commission for England and Wales v AG [2012] (poverty prevention and public benefit) essential questions were (i) whether a trust for the relief of poverty could be charitable if those who benefited from it were defined by their relationship to (a) an individual; (b) a company; or (c) an unincorporated organisation; (ii) whether the Act statutorily reversed pre-2006 legal authorities; (iii) whether the nature and extent of public benefit required in order for a trust for the prevention of poverty to be a charitable trust was the same as, or different from, the public benefit required of a trust for the relief of poverty. By the time of the hearing it was common ground that the Act did not cast doubt on the continued charitable status of organisations concerned with the prevention or relief of poverty (see para.22 of judgment). However, the court addressed issues of principle concerning the law of public benefit both before and after the coming into force of the Act.
answer
prevention of poverty entails addressing causes of poverty, while relief entails addressing consequences of poverty. prevention of poverty is recognised by section [3(1)(a)] as a stand-alone purpose which can be pursued, for example, by charities which provide $ management advice.
question
Helena Partnerships Ltd v HMRC [2012] EWCA
answer
decides that provision of housing does not fall under old fourth head of CH as a purpose of general public utility, and so is not CH unless it is limited to helping people disadvantaged by poverty, old age If housing had been provided only to disadvantaged people in need of relief, due to poverty, old age, infirmity, etc, it would have qualified as CH, but without such a restriction, it was not.
question
In re Compton [1945] Ch. 123 the Court of Appeal had to decide whether a trust for the education of the descendants of three named persons was a charitable trust
answer
no T can be CH unless it is directed to benefit of community or a section of community as opposed to benefit of private individuals or a fluctuating class of private individuals. He went on to say that in his opinion no T under terms of which a C in order to establish his title as a potential B has to show that he is related to some individual or that he is or was employed by some person or company can ever be a CH T since in such cases a personal relationship to individuals or an individual which is in its essence non-public enters into qualification.
question
public benefit, sectioning of the public
answer
Re Compton, education for descendants of named Bs, invalid, also Oppenheim for children of employees or former employees (although there were over 110,000 purported beneficiaries yet the trust failed because the nexus between beneficiaries was employment by a particular employer), NOT CH BUT EXCEPTION in Scarisbrick for poverty so in this case it is ok to section public.
