Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
62 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
3 stages to discerning whether a charitable purpose trust may take effect |
1) Established for the law regards as charitable (S.1, 2, 3 CA'11) 2) The purpose satisfies the public benefit requirement (s. 4) 3) The purpose is wholly & exclusively charitable |
|
Re Grove-Grady |
Benefit needs be identified as question of fact but there needs not be consensus
|
|
Re Shaw |
40 letter alphabet will provision not for public benefit
|
|
National Anti-Vivisection |
Banning animal experimentation failed public benefit, demonstrates weighing - medical research v animal welfare
|
|
Independent Schools Commissioner v CC for E & Wales |
Evidences how charities may charge where reasonable and necessary to the charity's work
|
|
IRC v Falkirk Temperance Cafe Trust |
Profit should be demonstrably plowed back into charitable work
|
|
Re Clarke |
Poverty is relative |
|
AITP Foundation's Application |
Can extend to people of moderate means and may include temporary financial hardship
|
|
IRC v Oldham Engineering Council |
Trust to set up the unemployed in trade/business was held charitable |
|
Re Segelman |
class size here was the testator's poor relatives, upheld as valid
|
|
Re Lucas |
Class size geographically limited to a parish or town was valid
|
|
Re Scarsbruick Will's Trust |
Class must consist of a particular description as opposed to specifically naming poor people
|
|
Dingle v Turner |
Issue- Should a trust for relief of poverty for poor employees be treated as charitable even though the class was defined by reference to common employment with a particular company?
read reasoning |
|
Harrowgate Fairtrade |
The tribunal upheld the Charity Commission's view that the shop's benefit in relieving poverty was too remote from its primary purpose of selling goods to the public McKenna J- "we note that because the appellant regards it as a self-evident fact not requiring proof, it has not taken the necessary steps to demonstrate in this appeal whether, and if so how, the sale of fairly traded goods relieves the poverty of its potential beneficiaries." |
|
Re Shaw |
◦HarmanJ “if the object be merely the increase of knowledge, that is not in itself acharitable object unlessit be combined with teaching or education.” |
|
Re Hopkin's WT |
WilberforceJ, distinguishing Re Shaw: - “Inorder to be charitable, research must either be of educational value to theresearcher or must be so directed as to lead to something which will pass intothe store of educational material, or so as to improve the sum of communicableknowledge in an area which education may cover – education in this last contextextending to the formation of literary taste and appreciation.”
|
|
Re Besterman |
Research the works of Voltaire and Rousseau - Needs: the subject matter be a useful subject of study, knowledge acquired disseminated to others, public benefit, or sufficient section |
|
Incorporated Council of Law Reporting v AG |
Education is now widely defined as encompassing the improving and dissemination of knowledge
|
|
IRC v McMullen |
Education not confined to formal instruction in the classroom, can encompass instruction of spiritual, moral, mental and physical elements.
Halisham- "Whathas to be remembered…is that both the legal conception of charity, and withinit the educated man’s ideas about education are not static, but moving andchanging. Both change with changes in ideas about social values. Both haveevolved with the years." "abalanced and systematic process of instruction, training and practicecontaining both spiritual, moral, mental and physical elements”(LordHailsham) |
|
Re British School of Archaeology |
Research should only be considered educational where it includes dissemination of the results
|
|
Re Compton |
Requirement that the applicant demonstrates that there is no personal nexus between the settlor and the class of beneficiaries, but rather that there is a sufficiently public benefit (Green L
|
|
Oppenheimer v Turner |
trust fund for education of a company's former + current employees children held invalid- despite employing over 100k people “(1) that the possible…beneficiaries must not benumerically negligible,and (2) that the quality which distinguishes them from other members of thecommunity, so that they form by themselves a section of it, must be a qualitywhich doesnot depend on their relationship to a particular individual…Agroup of persons may be numerous, but, if the nexus between them is theirpersonal relationship to a single propositus orto severalpropositi,they are neither the community nor a section of the community for charitablepurposes.” (Lord Simmonds) |
|
ISC v CC |
Re independent schools, The principle that the opportunity to a section of the public to benefit had not to be unreasonably restricted by an ability to pay fees, and that people in poverty had not to be excluded, was wrong.
|
|
IRC v Educational Grants Association |
followed Oppenheimer
|
|
Re Hopkins WT |
purpose masquerading as education not valid- trust for the advancement of adult education with reference to Labour Party principles was not charitable
|
|
Re Koeppler's WT |
Trust to educate the public in the differing ways of securing peace and avoiding war had no particular purpose and was valid
|
|
Re SouthPlace Ethical Society |
Ethics different to religion. the society here disseminated ethical principles. Definition of religion herein is outdated (belief in a god) |
|
Ex P Segerdal |
demonstratesthe traditional focus on belief in a supreme-being and worship thereof. |
|
Church of Scientology Decision |
The practice of this religious organisation was essentially private or limited to a private class of individuals |
|
Campbell & Cosauns v UK |
As a general proposition, religion should have a certain level of cogency, seriousness, coherence and importance |
|
Gnostic Decision |
Gnostic center was not charitable because there was no evidence of a clear an identifiable moral framework
|
|
United Grand Lodge |
Advancement of religion means taking steps to spread or promote religious belief. Freemasonry failed this
|
|
CC Guidance '08 |
◦…beliefin a god (or gods) or goddess (or goddesses) or supreme being, or divine ortranscendental being or entity or supernatural principle, which is the objector focus of the religion… …arelationship between the believer and the supreme being or entity [orprinciple] by showing worship of, reverence for or veneration of [it] …adegree of cogency, cohesion, seriousness and importance◦…anidentifiable positive, beneficial, moral or ethical framework |
|
Gilmour v Coats |
Carmenite Nuns- Cloistered A religion must be capable of producing beneficial effects and evidence will need to be given to demonstrate that its beliefs, doctrines and practices have this capability. Edification is okay if to the public (GREEN, MR |
|
Re Etherington |
no express requirement that public may attend Roman Catholic masses, gift was construed as such celebration of a religous rite in private fails public benefit, since any benefit of prayer is incapable of proof in the legal sense, and any edification is privately limited |
|
Neville Estates |
Land held for Catford Synagogue was held for charitable purposes for the advancement of the Jewish religion. Differed from the Carmenites because Jews spent time in the community |
|
Preston Down Trust |
Balancethebenefit and advantage where a case of detriment is raised, by examiningevidence before them as to the ‘public’ and ‘beneficial’ nature of theparticular organisation. Here an extremely (by way of its scripture & doctrines) secluded Church was held charitable, given it had made greater effort to engage with the public (advertising of services on meeting hall noticeboards and on the PBCCwebsite; more regular street preaching; and increased engagement with the wider community.) held charitable |
|
National Federation of Spiritual Healers |
Provision of facilities to ease suffering was a charitable purpose |
|
Re Re North Devon and West Somerset Relief Fund |
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. Here judgement relied on charitable intent but this is arguably not needed (Re Ulverston New Hospital Building Trust |
|
IRC v Oldham Training and Enterprise Council |
Whilst the Council in question did confer public benefit of vocational education and training, it had private benefits of promoting trade & commerce, and providing support services and advice to new businesses. Lightman J concluded these ancillary purposes were more than incidental and negated charitable status |
|
ViRSA |
Commission originally decided that the provision of training and guidance to rural communities and maintaining those communities to promote trade as a whole was charitable, but revoked decade later |
|
Re Shakespeare Memorial Trust |
Property held on trust to promote the works of shakespeare held under education heading as per Pemsel's case |
|
Re Royal Choir Society |
A body for specific artistic purposes may be charitable |
|
Re Delius |
Trust for the composer Delius was considered "worth appreciating" (Roxburgh J) and thus educational. Suggests that the music of a composer must be worth appreciating |
|
Re Pinion |
Allcontents of art, paintings and furniture to be left on trust to be maintainedas a museum for the public to view “Ican conceive of no useful object to be served in foisting upon the public thismass of junk. It has neither public utility nor educational value”(Harman LJ) |
|
Re Moss |
can be for a particular animal |
|
Tatham v Drummond |
or for welfare of all animals here the RSPCA |
|
Re Grove Grady |
trust to buy land as a sanctuary for animals was held not to be of charitable purpose |
|
National Antivivsection |
balancing act |
|
Re Wedgwood |
Trust for the prevention of cruelty to animals serves public morality and thus is charitable |
|
Latimer v CIR |
cite in conjunction with S.1 (1)(a) charitable trust is void if non charitable purpose is not incidental L Millet- distinction should be drawn between ends, means and consequences. if ends are exclusively charitable then charitable status is not lost |
|
AG v Ross |
SU charitable, despite one o its objects relating to affiliation with the non-charitable NUS, since this was an ancillary purpose that FURTHER the main purpose, education |
|
Chichester Diocesan Fund |
trust void- testator had provided that trustees could choose a NCP by including 'or benevolent object or objects' |
|
Re Macduff |
trust for charitable purpose OR philanthropic was not charitable |
|
AG of the Bahamas v Royal Trust |
'And' does not necessarily mean trust will be charitable. Presence of both 'and' and 'or' meant trustee still had a choice to act uncharitably |
|
Bowman v Secular Society |
Cannot pursue political objectives |
|
McGovern v AG; CC Guidance 2010 |
An organization will be considered pursuing political purposes where its main purpose is party-political in nature or lobbies for change of law, policy and or government position |
|
Re Rhymer |
Where gift is intended for a particular charitable institution, as opposed to institutional purpose, and the institution has failed to exist prior to testators death - Initial Failure |
|
Re Spence |
Megarry VC- indicates that a gift for specified purpose or institution means general charitable intent is unlikely to be found |
|
Re Wright |
If an acceptable (legally speaking) charitable purpose fails, the court will apply cy-pres regardless of intent |
|
Re Hardwood |
Easier to find general charitable intent where the organization never existed, depending on circumstances |
|
S. 62-67 |
Surplus Funds Gift charitable, but organisation does not need it S.67 - Original spirit must be maintained |