Attorney-General, At The Relaion Of Barrett And Hayman v The Mayor, Bailiffs, And Commonalty Of The City Of Exeter, Defendants: 10 Mar 1826

Semble. It is not a general rule of a court of equity, that a charitable gift for the benefits of the poor is to be confined to such poor as do not receive parish relief. Where trustees of a charity, under an instrument of doubtful construction, have acted honestly, though erroneously, they will not be charged in respect of past mis-application of the funds. Reluctance of the court to compel a corporation to make a discovery of the property which they possess applicable to general corporate purposes. In the reign of Henry VII, lands were given to the corporation of Exeter and their successors, for the aid and relief of the poor Citizens and inhabitants of Exeter, ‘who are heavily burdened by fee-farm rents of that city and other impositions and talliages’ Quaere, whether the rents ought to be applied to the relief only of such poor inhabitants of Exeter as do not receive parish relief? Quaere, whether it is a due administration of such a charity to apply the rights to the payment of fee-farm rents due from the city, repairing the goal, maintaining the prisoners, and other public purposes?
[1826] EngR 856, (1826) 2 Russ 45, (1826) 38 ER 252
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedLehtimaki and Others v Cooper SC 29-Jul-2020
Charitable Company- Directors’ Status and Duties
A married couple set up a charitable foundation to assist children in developing countries. When the marriage failed an attempt was made to establish a second foundation with funds from the first, as part of W leaving the Trust. Court approval was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 22 October 2021; Ref: scu.325620