Southwood and Another v Attorney-General: CA 28 Jun 2000

An organisation set up to educate others as to the ways of ‘militarism and disarmament and related fields’ was not charitable. Whilst peace is to be recognised as worthy of promotion, the organisation was set up to persuade others of the views of those behind it. Pacifism as such was not necessarily in the public interest, and unless an organisation could demonstrate that its purposes were for the public benefit it was not entitled to charitable status, and it was not for the court to seek to express a view on the topic.

Citations:

Gazette 20-Jul-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 204

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Charity

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89440

Peter Martin Southwood, David Ronald Parson v Attorney-General: ChD 11 Nov 1998

A trust set up to educate on the topic of ‘militarism and disarmament’ was primarily set up for political purposes and so was not eligible for charitable status. Ambiguity in stated purposes could be resolved by looking at surrounding activities.

Citations:

Times 26-Oct-1998, Gazette 11-Nov-1998, [1998] EWHC Ch 297

Links:

Bailii

Charity

Updated: 20 May 2022; Ref: scu.89439

Oldham Borough Council v Attorney General: CA 28 Jul 1992

The cy-pres doctrine could be allowed to be applied to allow the sale of land if such an action would remain within the purpose of the original charitable gift.

Judges:

Dillon, Russell, Farquharson LJJ

Citations:

Gazette 28-Oct-1992, [1992] EWCA Civ 21, [1993] Ch 210, [1993] 2 WLR 224, [1993] 2 All ER 432

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Charities Act 1960 13

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Charity, Land

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.84438

Guild v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 6 May 1992

The will left land for a sports centre to a local authority which no longer existed. If the gift was charitable, the gift would be applied cy pres, but if not it would fail and pass to the family and be subect to Inheritance Tax.
Held: A gift to a local authority of land on which to construct a sports centre, was in its nature charitable, and the gift is exempt therefore from Inheritance Tax.

Judges:

Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Roskill, Lord Griffiths, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Lowry

Citations:

Gazette 06-May-1992, [1990] UKHL 10, [1992] 2 AC 310, [1992] UKHL 16, [1993] Imm AR 112, [1992] 1 WLR 1052, [1992] 4 All ER 673

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Finance Act 1975 Sch 6 para 10, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 360(3), Recreational Charities Act 1958 1

Citing:

CitedRussell’s Executor v Balden 1989
. .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen ChD 1978
The Football Association set up a trust to promote football and other sports in schools and universities. The parties disputed whether a valid charitable trust had been created.
Held: The trust was not valid as one for the advancement of . .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen HL 6-Mar-1980
HL Charity – Promotion of sport – Trust created ‘to organise or provide or assist in the organisation and provision of facilities which will enable and encourage pupils of schools and universities in any part of . .
CitedBaddeley (Trustees of the Newtown Trust) v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 17-Feb-1955
Land had been conveyed to trustees for the moral, social and physical well-being of a community. The court considered whether the trust was charitable in nature, where it was said that it confined the benefits to a class of people who do not . .
CitedIncome Tax Special Commissioners v Pemsel HL 20-Jul-1891
Charitable Purposes used with technical meaning
The House was asked whether, in a taxing statute applying to the whole of the United Kingdom and allowing for deductions from and allowances against the income of land vested in trustees for charitable purposes, the words ‘charitable purposes’ . .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen CA 1979
The Football Association had set up a trust to promote football in universities and schools, claiming this was charitable under the 1958 Act.
Held: The trust was not charitable whether as being for the advancement of education, or in the . .
CitedWeir v Crum-Brown HL 6-Feb-1908
If a bequest in a will to a class of persons is capable of application by the trustees, or failing them, the court, the gift is not void for uncertainty. Lord Macnaghten said: ‘The testator has taken pains to provide competent judges. It is for the . .
CitedCommissioner of Valuation for Northern Ireland v Lurgan Borough Council CANI 1968
The respondent local authority owned an indoor swimming pool. It claimed exemption from rates under section 2 of the 1854 Act saying that it was used exclusively for the purposes of a recreational charity under the Act of 1958.
Held: (By a . .
CitedNational Deposit Friendly Society Trustees v Skegness Urban District Council HL 1959
The House considered the meaning of the phrase ‘the advancement of . . social welfare’ in the 1955 Act. Lord Denning said: ‘A person is commonly said to be engaged in ‘social welfare’ when he is engaged in doing good for others who are in need – in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Inheritance Tax, Charity, Scotland

Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.81079

Bath and Wells Diocesan Board of Finance and Another v Jenkinson and Others: ChD 6 Sep 2000

Where there was a gift of land on charitable trusts, but where the gift was first expressed to be unlimited in time, but later in the deed provided powers for revocation, and conditions for defeasance, it must remain a matter of construction of the particular deed to decide whether the gift was in perpetuity. In the current cases the reversionary provisions were void for remoteness, and the trustees had acquire a possessory title for charity on the trusts of the original deeds.

Citations:

Times 06-Sep-2000, Gazette 05-Oct-2000

Land, Charity, Trusts

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.78288

Glen v Gregg: 1882

Citations:

(1882) 21 ChD 513

Cited by:

CitedPark v Cho and Others ChD 24-Jan-2014
The parties disputed the chairmanship of a charity. The claimant succeeded, but a third party later intervened saying that permission had not first been obtained from the Charity Commission as required. The defendant now appealed against the lifting . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.567258

In Re Estlin: 1903

A home of rest was to be provided for lady teachers.
Held: This was a valid charitable bequest.

Judges:

Kekewich J

Citations:

(1903) 72 LJ Ch 687

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.464222

In re Ford’s Charity: 6 Jul 1855

A new scheme for the development of a new school which had not previously been considered by the court did not amount to a matter pending, even though another scheme in respect of the same charity funds had been so considered. He held that it was therefore necessary for the Charity Commissioners’ sanction to be obtained in respect of the application to the court. A matter pending, for the purposes of the Act, meant a continuation of something directed by the court.

Judges:

Sir Richard Kindersley V-C

Citations:

[1855] EngR 661 (A), (1855) 3 Drew 324

Links:

Commonlii

Statutes:

Charitable Trusts Act 1853 17

Cited by:

CitedPark v Cho and Others ChD 24-Jan-2014
The parties disputed the chairmanship of a charity. The claimant succeeded, but a third party later intervened saying that permission had not first been obtained from the Charity Commission as required. The defendant now appealed against the lifting . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.292583

The Attorney-General, At The Relation Of Joseph Greenhill v Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge; Trinity College, Oxford, And Frederick Greenhill: 4 May 1865

Lord Chelmsford LC said, of an argument by that college that the leave of the Charity Commissioners ought to have been obtained to the plaintiff’s proceedings but had not been, that: ‘The objection if persisted in must prevail, but in that case [he] would give leave to apply to the commissioners, and he would suspend the decree for that purpose.’

Citations:

[1865] EngR 431, (1865) 34 Beav 654, (1865) 55 ER 788

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPark v Cho and Others ChD 24-Jan-2014
The parties disputed the chairmanship of a charity. The claimant succeeded, but a third party later intervened saying that permission had not first been obtained from the Charity Commission as required. The defendant now appealed against the lifting . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Litigation Practice

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.281343

Morelle Ltd v Waterworth: CA 1955

The court was asked (1) Was the assurance to the Plaintiff Company of the unexpired residue of a term of years in house property in London an assurance of land in mortmain within the terms of section 1 of the Mortmain and Charitable Uses Act, 1888? (2) If so, was the term so assured automatically forfeited to the Crown by virtue of the same subsection?
Held: Both questions were answered affirmatively.

Citations:

[1955] 1 QB 1

Statutes:

Mortmain and Charitable Uses Act 1888

Cited by:

Per incuriamMorelle Ltd v Wakeling CA 1955
The plaintiff asserted ownership of leasehold land. A similar situation had arisen in an earlier case befoe the Court of appeal, and the court was asked to decide that that case had been decided per incuriam.
Held: The per incuriam principle . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Charity

Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.272569

Affleck and Others v Newcastle Mind and Others: EAT 10 Mar 1999

EAT Employees of an unincorporated charitable association are employed by the management committee or other similar body within the association, and not by the members of the association at large. The employees have continuity of employment despite any change in the constitution of the committee. In practice such actions should be brought against a representative member or members of the committee. The case was remitted to the ET to hold a case management hearing to determine who should be the correct respondents.

Judges:

Morison J

Citations:

Gazette 11-Aug-1999, (1999) IRLR 405, [1999] UKEAT 537 – 98 – 1003, [1999] ICR 852

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Charities Act 1993 97(1), Employment Rights Act 1996 218(2)

Employment, Company, Charity

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.77664

Re Snowden: ChD 1970

Two summonses came before the court arising form wills of a Mr Snowden and a Mrs Henderson. Norman Snowden, had made sales adeeming bequests but, in consequence, pecuniary legacies and bequests of shares of residue were greater than contemplated. The pecuniary and residuary legatees were six charities who agreed, if the Attorney-General had no objection, that various sums should be paid to the specific legatees. In Mrs Henderson’s case a manuscript but unattested addition to the will was omitted from probate. The proved will gave the residue after payment of various pecuniary legacies was left to charity generally. The administrators sought the approval of the Court, if the Attorney-General consented, to give effect to the manuscript alteration. The A-G argued: ‘It has been a long established view that the Attorney-General has no power to authorise the application of the funds of a charity for non-charitable purposes. This precise problem has been put to counsel for the Attorney-General for over 40 to 50 years. Each counsel has treated it as clear law. In the present case the point of moral obligation has been raised.’
Held: The court would not dissent from that view unless satisfied that it was wrong. He was so satisfied: ‘In the result I am satisfied that the court and the Attorney-General have power to give authority to charity trustees to make ex gratia payments out of funds held on charitable trusts. It is however a power which is not to be exercised lightly or on slender grounds but only in cases where it can fairly be said that if the charity were an individual it would be morally wrong of him to refuse to make the payment.’ There were four reasons for that conclusion: (1) As charity depends for its continued existence on the recognition by others of moral obligations to give it would be odd if a charity could not likewise give effect to its own moral obligations. (2) Analogous powers exist in other cases, such as the management of the property of mental patients and what is for the benefit of an infant. (3) In sanctioning compromises on behalf of charities the Court does pay regard to moral obligations. (4) The Attorney-General has power to relieve trustees from their strict legal obligations to make full restitution for breaches of trust committed by them. The Court or the Attorney-General may authorise: ‘a payment…out of charity funds which is motivated simply and solely by the belief of the trustees or other persons administering the funds that the charity is under a moral obligation to make the payment’,

Judges:

Cross J

Citations:

[1970] Ch 700

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAttorney General v British Museum ChD 27-May-2005
The trustees brought a claim against the Attorney-General seeking clarification of their duties and powers to return objects which were part of the collection in law, but where a moral duty might exist to return it to a former owner. Here drawings . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 17 May 2022; Ref: scu.225528

Re Colonial Bishoprics Fund 1841: 1935

The court was asked to make a order with respect to the Fund, a trust established in England for the endowment of Bishoprics in the Colonies.
Held: The court had jurisdiction to make a cy-pres order. Since the trustees of the fund were in this country and the trusts were established here, he could direct the scheme, even though the objects of bounty were located abroad. It was not properly described as a foreign charity.

Judges:

Luxmoore J

Citations:

[1935] Ch 148

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGaudiya Mission and others v Brahmachary CA 30-Jul-1997
The High Court had found the plaintiff to be a charity, and ordered the Attorney-General to be joined in. The A-G appealed that order saying that the plaintiff was not a charity within the 1993 Act. The charity sought to spread the Vaishnava . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.200674

Re Lepton’s Charity: 1972

Citations:

[1972] Ch 276

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRe Camden’s Charity 1881
. .

Cited by:

CitedVarsani and others v Jesani, Patel and Her Majesty’s Attorney-General CA 3-Apr-1998
A Hindu religious sect, constituted as a charity, had split into two factions.
Held: The court had jurisdiction to order that the assets of the sect should be divided under the powers in the Act, and held upon separate trusts for the two . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.187520

Re Faraker; Faraker v Durell: CA 1912

A gift had been made to a named charity. No purposes were mentioned.
Held: The gift had not lapsed as a result of the Charity Commissioners amalgamating the charity with other charities, to be administered by a newly constituted body of trustees, and significantly expanding its purposes. The original class of persons intended to be benefited by the charity, poor widows, continued to be benefited by the charity in its amalgamated form. The charity never ceased to exist. There was therefore no lapse.
Farwell LJ said: ‘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 that charitable end is well established the means are only machinery, and no alteration of the machinery can destroy the charitable trust for the benefit of which the machinery is provided.’
Kennedy LJ said: ‘but the question which I have felt some doubt about is, if the continuance – that word has been used throughout – of a charity is requisite, what is the essential thing to constitute the continuance of that charity as the subject of a charitable gift in a will? . . no case has been shewn to me in which an endowed charity has been treated as having, so to speak, lost its life by reason of the exercise of the perfectly competent authority under parliamentary sanction of the Charity Commissioners, or the equally competent authority of this Court, under which its funds have come to be applied somewhat differently to the way in which they were applied under the original foundation . . It seems to be the law, that an endowed charity, to whatever purpose its funds are devoted, if and so long as they are devoted to some charitable purpose under some duly authorized scheme, remains still existent so as to draw to it a sum of money given by a will for, presumably, the same purpose as the original charity.’

Judges:

Cozens-Hardy MR, Farwell and Kennedy LJJ

Citations:

[1912] 2 Ch 488

Charity

Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.556257

Attorney-General v Mathieson: CA 1907

The Rev John Wilkinson, ran charities in Stoke Newington in London, including ‘the Mildmay Mission to the Jews’. He was given received andpound;1350 from ‘a lady’ locally who suggested that the money be used for a convalescent home. He pointed out that the provision of a home and school for children was more pressing. She replied: ‘Use it for that or any other way you like’. He purchased Cromwell Lodge, in his own name, and with no declaration of trust. The rest was used to fit out and equip Cromwell Lodge for use as a school and home for Jewish children. A year later a trust deed was executed conveying Cromwell Lodge, together with other property, to trustees (including Mr Wilkinson) on trust for the purposes of the Mission, namely ‘to preach the Gospel . . to Jews in Great Britain and Ireland (and also in foreign parts if it is deemed desirable), employing in the prosecution of the work’ activities including ‘homes for destitute children, agencies for procuring employment and assisting emigration, night schools . . sewing classes . . and for promoting the salvation of . . souls’. The Deed had other provisions, for matters such as the trustees’ powers of sale, investment and appointment of a director.
The Court of Appeal was asked whether the Attorney-General’s consent to the proposed sale of Cromwell Lodge was required under the 1853 Act. That in turn depended on whether the Deed was binding on the trustees, or whether, as Kekewich J had held, it: ‘made no difference to Mr Wilkinson’s powers’. If the former view was correct then the trustees could not apply the proceeds of sale of Cromwell Lodge as income; if the latter view was right, they could do so only with the consent of the Attorney General.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The latter view was right.
Sir Herbert Cozens-Hardy MR said that the trustees appointed under the Deed: ‘do not, and cannot, challenge the validity of the trust deed under which they are acting, and it is plain that it would be a breach of trust to apply the proceeds of the sale of the house as income. Even if Mr Wilkinson could originally have done this, they are now bound to treat the proceeds of sale as capital, and invest it accordingly.’
He continued: ‘There is, moreover, a further difficulty in the way of the trustees. When money is given by charitable persons for somewhat indefinite purposes, a time comes when it is desirable, and indeed necessary, to prescribe accurately the terms of the charitable trust, and to prepare a scheme for that purpose. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the individual or the committee entrusted with the money must be deemed to have implied authority for and on behalf of the donors to declare the trusts to which the sums contributed are to be subject. If the individual or the committee depart from the general objects of the original donors, any deed of trust thus transgressing reasonable limits might be set aside by proper proceedings instituted by the Attorney-General, or possibly by one of the donors. But unless and until set aside or rectified, such a deed must be treated as in all respects decisive of the trusts which, by the authority of the donors, are to regulate the charity. And it is irrelevant to urge that the donors did not originally give any express directions on the subject . .’

Judges:

Sir Herbert Cozens-Hardy MR

Citations:

[1907] 2 Ch 383

Statutes:

Charitable Trusts Act 1853

Cited by:

CitedShergill and Others v Khaira and Others SC 11-Jun-2014
The parties disputed the trusts upon which three Gurdwaras (Sikh Temples) were held. The Court of Appeal had held that the issues underlying the dispute were to be found in matters of the faith of the Sikh parties, and had ordered a permanent stay. . .
ConsideredIn re Orphan Working School and Alexandra Orphanage’s Contract 1912
An established trust had collected subscriptions over many years, ptting those subscriptions wth other funds derived from the sale of one school property for the purchase of another. That property in turn came to be sold, and questions arose as to . .
CitedJeeves v Imperial Foods Ltd, Pension Scheme ChD 27-Jan-1986
Walton J explained that there may be many ‘occasions in law in which a fund is held on trust, but at the particular point there is no final definitive trust deed’. He went on to say that ‘it may very well be that . . a person who had contributed to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.542960

In re Lacy; Royal General Theatrical Fund Association v Kydd: 1899

Equity prevents trustees from raising limitation against their beneficiaries.
An executor, qua executor, is not an express trustee.

Judges:

Stirling J

Citations:

[1899] 2 Ch 149

Statutes:

Mortmain Act 1736

Cited by:

CitedWilliams v Central Bank of Nigeria SC 19-Feb-2014
Bank not liable for fraud of customer
The appellant sought to make the bank liable for a fraud committed by the Bank’s customer, the appellant saying that the Bank knew or ought to have known of the fraud. The court was asked whether a party liable only as a dishonest assistant was a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Charity

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.537362

Berry v St Marylebone Borough Council: CA 1957

The Theosophy Society sought exemption from rates as a charity.
Held: When assessing whether an organisation could receive relief against rates as a charity, the main objects should be exclusively concerned with those matters and ordinarily the court could look only to the organization’s written constitution.
Romer LJ said ‘In our opinion, when an organizational body has a written constitution, it is to that, and to that alone, to which the court should normally resort in order to ascertain its objects for the purpose of Section 8 of the Act. And as Lord Buckmaster pointed out in Macaulay -v- O’Donnell (1943) Chancery 435 note: Unless an English word or phrase has, in relation to the organization, a special meaning, evidence as to its meaning is not properly admissible. The House of Lords would not formally reject the affidavit which had been filed in Macaulay -v- O’Donnell, explaining the word ‘nucleus’ in the Society’s first object , and we are willing to take note of what theosophy is, and what theosophists believe, as stated by Mrs. Berry in her affidavit. It would, however, be going too far, in our opinion, to accept as admissible, in so far as it is directed to the question of construction, evidence of how theosophists explain the meaning of their objects . . the interpretation of the object is a matter for the court and not for members of the Society.’

Judges:

Romer LJ, Lord Evershed MR and Ormerod LJ

Citations:

[1958] Ch 406, [1957] 3 All ER 677

Statutes:

Rating and Valuation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955 8

Rating, Charity

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.464217

Inland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen: CA 1979

The Football Association had set up a trust to promote football in universities and schools, claiming this was charitable under the 1958 Act.
Held: The trust was not charitable whether as being for the advancement of education, or in the fourth head of charity, or under the Recreational Charities Act 1958.
Bridge LJ (dissenting) said: ‘I turn therefore to consider whether the object defined by clause 3(a) is charitable under the express terms of section 1 of the Recreational Charities Act 1958. Are the facilities for recreation contemplated in this clause to be ‘provided in the interests of social welfare’ under section 1(1)? If this phrase stood without further statutory elaboration, I should not hesitate to decide that sporting facilities for persons undergoing any formal process of education are provided in the interests of social welfare. Save in the sense that the interest of social welfare can only be served by the meeting of some social need, I cannot accept the judge’s view that the interests of social welfare can only be served in relation to some ‘deprived’ class. The judge found this view reinforced by the requirement of subsection (2)(a) of section 1 that the facilities must be provided ‘with the object of improving the conditions of life for the persons for whom the facilities are primarily intended;’ Here again I can see no reason to conclude that only the deprived can have their conditions of life improved. Hyde Park improves the conditions of life for residents in Mayfair and Belgravia as much as for those in Pimlico or the Portobello Road, and the village hall may improve the conditions of life for the squire and his family as well as for the cottagers. The persons for whom the facilities here are primarily intended are pupils of schools and universities, as defined in the trust deed, and these facilities are in my judgment unquestionably to be provided with the object of improving their conditions of life. Accordingly the ultimate question on which the application of the statute to this trust depends, is whether the requirements of section l(2)(b)(i) are satisfied on the ground that such pupils as a class have need of facilities for games or sports which will promote their physical education and development by reason either of their youth or of their social and economic circumstances, or both. The overwhelming majority of pupils within the definition are young persons and the tiny minority of mature students can be ignored as de minimis. There cannot surely be any doubt that young persons as part of their education do need facilities for organised games and sports both by reason of their youth and by reason of their social and economic circumstances. They cannot provide such facilities for themselves but are dependent on what is provided for them.’

Judges:

Stamp, Orr, Bridge LJJ

Citations:

[1979] 1 WLR 130

Statutes:

Recreational Charities Act 1958 1

Citing:

Appeal fromInland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen ChD 1978
The Football Association set up a trust to promote football and other sports in schools and universities. The parties disputed whether a valid charitable trust had been created.
Held: The trust was not valid as one for the advancement of . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromInland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen HL 6-Mar-1980
HL Charity – Promotion of sport – Trust created ‘to organise or provide or assist in the organisation and provision of facilities which will enable and encourage pupils of schools and universities in any part of . .
CitedGuild v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 6-May-1992
The will left land for a sports centre to a local authority which no longer existed. If the gift was charitable, the gift would be applied cy pres, but if not it would fail and pass to the family and be subect to Inheritance Tax.
Held: A gift . .
CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.273192

Inland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen: ChD 1978

The Football Association set up a trust to promote football and other sports in schools and universities. The parties disputed whether a valid charitable trust had been created.
Held: The trust was not valid as one for the advancement of education, and nor did it satisfy section 1 of the Act of 1958. Walton J discussed the words ‘social welfare’ in subsection (1): ‘In my view, however, these words in themselves indicate that there is some sort of deprivation – not, of course, by any means necessarily of money – which falls to be alleviated; and I think that this is made even clearer by the terms of subsection (2)(a). The facilities must be provided with the object of improving the conditions of life for persons for whom the facilities are primarily intended. In other words, they must be to some extent and in some way deprived persons.’

Judges:

Walton J

Citations:

[1978] 1 WLR 664

Statutes:

Recreational Charities Act 1958 1

Cited by:

At first InstanceInland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen HL 6-Mar-1980
HL Charity – Promotion of sport – Trust created ‘to organise or provide or assist in the organisation and provision of facilities which will enable and encourage pupils of schools and universities in any part of . .
Appeal fromInland Revenue Commissioners v McMullen CA 1979
The Football Association had set up a trust to promote football in universities and schools, claiming this was charitable under the 1958 Act.
Held: The trust was not charitable whether as being for the advancement of education, or in the . .
CitedGuild v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 6-May-1992
The will left land for a sports centre to a local authority which no longer existed. If the gift was charitable, the gift would be applied cy pres, but if not it would fail and pass to the family and be subect to Inheritance Tax.
Held: A gift . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.273191

In re Goode: 1905

Gifts made for the pormotion of the efficiency of armed services were charitable in nature.

Citations:

[1905] 2 Ch 60

Cited by:

CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Glasgow Police Athletic Association HL 9-Mar-1953
The House was asked whether the taxpayer association was established for ‘Charitable purposes only’ so as to benefit from tax exemptions. The association promoted sporting activities among members of the Glasgow police.
Held: Though the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.251600

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Yorkshire Agricultural Society: 1928

If a substantial part of the objects of a body of persons is to benefit its own members, the body of persons is not established for charitable purposes only. Atkin LJ considered the problems arising from the fact that the Association had more than one purpose: ‘First of all it is said: No, this Society was in fact formed for the purpose of giving benefit to its members; it is nothing but a club for the mutual advantage of the members of the club. If that were so, I agree that the claim of the Society would fail, both because it could not be said that the Society was established for a charitable purpose and because it certainly could not be said that it was established for a charitable purpose only. There can be no doubt that a society formed for the purpose merely of benefiting its own members, though it may be to the public advantage that its members should be benefited by being educated or having their aesthetic tastes improved or whatever the object may be, would not be for a charitable purpose, and if it were a substantial part of the object that it should benefit its members I should think that it would not be established for a charitable purpose only. But, on the other hand, if the benefit given to its members is only given to them with a view of giving encouragement and carrying out the main purpose, which is a charitable purpose, then I think the mere fact that the members are benefited in the course of promoting the charitable purpose would not prevent the society being established for charitable purposes only.’

Judges:

Atkin, LJ

Citations:

[1928] 1 KB 611

Cited by:

CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Glasgow Police Athletic Association HL 9-Mar-1953
The House was asked whether the taxpayer association was established for ‘Charitable purposes only’ so as to benefit from tax exemptions. The association promoted sporting activities among members of the Glasgow police.
Held: Though the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.251604

Oxford Group v Inland Revenue Commissioners: 1949

If a non-charitable object of an association is itself one of the purposes of the body of persons and is not merely incidental to the charitable purpose, the body of persons is not a body of persons formed for charitable purposes only within the meaning of the Income Tax Acts.

Citations:

[1949] 2 All ER 537

Cited by:

CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Glasgow Police Athletic Association HL 9-Mar-1953
The House was asked whether the taxpayer association was established for ‘Charitable purposes only’ so as to benefit from tax exemptions. The association promoted sporting activities among members of the Glasgow police.
Held: Though the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.251606

Re Mellody: 1918

A gift to the schoolchildren of Turton was as valid a charitable gift as a gift to the inhabitants of the Borough would be. The gift was a gift ‘for purposes beneficial to a section of the community’; and the schoolchildren themselves were ‘a very important section of the community’.

Judges:

Eve J

Citations:

[1918] 1 Ch 228

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGibbs v Harding and others ChD 12-Jan-2007
The testatrix left a will anticipating making another. The court was asked whether a clause leaving her estate to ‘be taken over by the Diocese of Westminster to hold in trust for the Black community of Hackney’ was valid.
Held: The gift was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.247693

In Re Strakosch: 1949

The court may construe a gift as impliedly limited to charitable purposes. Lord Greene MR said: ‘In Williams’ Trustees v Inland Revenue Commissioners the House of Lords has laid down very clearly that in order to come within Lord Macnaghten’s fourth class, the gift must be not only for the benefit of the community but beneficial in a way which the law regards as charitable. In order to satisfy the latter it must be within the ‘spirit and intendment’ of the preamble of the Statute of Elizabeth. That preamble set out what were then regarded as purposes which should be treated as charitable in law. It is obvious that as time passed and conditions changed common opinion as to what was properly covered by the word charitable also changed. This has been recognized by the courts as the most cursory examination of the cases shows. In order to be within the spirit and intendment of the preamble we take it that one must find something charitable in the same sense as the recited purposes are charitable. Lord Macnaghten’s fourth class is represented in the preamble by the repair of bridges, etc., and possibly by the maintenance of Houses of Correction. This negatives any suggestion that charitable must be confined to the poor (Verge v. Somerville).
We have come to the conclusion that though undoubtedly of benefit to the community the purpose under consideration is not ‘charitable’ in the sense in which the benefits to the community instanced in the preamble are charitable. The benefit, as we understand it, does not have to be in any way ejusdem generis with the recited purposes but it has to be charitable in the same sense.’

Judges:

Lord Greene MR

Citations:

[1949] 1 Ch 529

Statutes:

Income Tax Act 1918 37(1)(a)

Citing:

CitedVerge v Somerville PC 1924
On an appeal from New South Wales, The Board considered the validity of a gift ‘to the trustees’ of the Repatriation Fund or other similar fund for the benefit of New South Wales returned soldiers’.
Held: Trusts for education and religion do . .
CitedWilliams’ Trustees v Inland Revenue Commisioners HL 1947
A trust was created by the memorandum and articles of association of a company. The 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 ‘for promoting the moral . .

Cited by:

CitedGibbs v Harding and others ChD 12-Jan-2007
The testatrix left a will anticipating making another. The court was asked whether a clause leaving her estate to ‘be taken over by the Diocese of Westminster to hold in trust for the Black community of Hackney’ was valid.
Held: The gift was . .
CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.247694

Re Walker: 1901

Citations:

[1901] 1 Ch 897

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedX v A and others ChD 29-Nov-2005
The wife sought confirmation that the trustees of a discretionary marriage settlement created by her husband could release sums which she intended to pay out for charitable purposes.
Held: The trust required money to be released for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Charity

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.237755

In re Clergy Orphan Corporation: CA 1894

The court considered the extent of the prohibition on restrictions on the sale of land by a charity to land forming part of the endowment of the charity.
Held: Davey LJ said: ‘All property of every description belonging to or held in trust for a charity . . is an endowment within the meaning of the Act.’
He refused to limit the word ‘endow’ in section 66 of the Charitable Trusts Act 1853 to property held upon some special purpose or trust in connection with the charity as distinguished from the general purposes of the charity and applied it to all property belonging to or held in trust for a charity, whether held upon trusts or conditions which render it lawful to apply the capital to the maintenance of the charity or upon trusts which confine the charitable application to the income.

Judges:

Davey LJ, Lord Herschell LC, Lindley LJ

Citations:

[1894] 3 Ch 145

Statutes:

Charitable Trusts Act 1853 66

Cited by:

CitedBayoumi v Women’s Total Abstinence Union Ltd and Another CA 5-Nov-2003
A charity entered into a contract for the sale of land. It failed to comply with the requirements under the Act. The purchaser assigned the benefit of the contract, to the claimant who sought to enforce the contract.
Held: The section only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Land

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.235721

National Society v School Board of London: 1874

The National Society raised large sums by subscription and made grants in favour of schools in which children were to be instructed (in addition to reading, writing and arithmetic) in holy scripture and in the liturgy and catechism of the established church. Former owners of land conveyed under the 1841 Act had only the remedy of complaint to the Educational Board.

Citations:

(1874) 18 Eq 608

Statutes:

School Sites Act 1841

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFraser and Another v Canterbury Diocesan Board of Finance and others HL 27-Oct-2005
Land had been acquired by a deed under the 1841 Act, but had in 1995 ceased to be used as a school ‘for the education of children and adults of the labouring manufacturing and other poorer classes . . And for no other purpose ‘. Under the Act, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Charity

Updated: 14 May 2022; Ref: scu.231638

In re Gillingham Bus Disaster Fund: 1958

Judges:

Harman J

Citations:

[1958] Ch 300

Statutes:

Charitable Trusts (Validation) Act 1954

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedUlrich v Treasury Solicitor and Others ChD 28-Jan-2005
A fund was set up before the 1954 Act. Its objects were not entirley charitable, being for the employees of a company. The trustees appealed refusal of a declaration that it was charitable.
Held: The intention was to apply the funds for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.224377

Scarisbrick’s Will Trusts, In re: ChD 1950

The court considered whether a trust was charitable.
Held: The distinction lay in whether the gift took the form of a trust under which capital was retained and the income only applied for the benefit of the objects, in which case the gift was charitable, or whether the gift was one under which the capital was immediately distributable among the objects, in which case the gift was not a charity.

Judges:

Roxburgh J

Citations:

[1950] 1 All ER 143, [1950] Ch 226

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedThe Attorney General v Price 26-Nov-1810
Devise to A and his heirs; with a direction, that yearly he and his heirs shall for ever divide and distribute according to his and their discretion amongst the testator’s poor kinsmen and kinswomen, and amongst their offspring and issue dwelling . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromIn re Scarisbrick’s Will Trusts, Cockshott v Public Trustee CA 1951
Possible Charity for poor persons within an area
The court was asked whether a trusts for poor persons within a restricted category, the testator’s descendants, not meeting the usual requirement that the benefits be available to a wider section of the community, may be held charitable.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Charity

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.181256

In re Compton; Powell v Compton: CA 1945

The court considered the charitable status of a trust ‘for the education of Compton and Powell and Montague children’.
Held: It was not charitable. If the group of beneficiaries is distinguishable from other members of the community by a relationship with a particular individual or entity, whether as a result of family ties, or through contract, or by their employment or by membership of an association, that group will not be considered to constitute the public for charitable purposes.
The essential requirement of a public charity is that it dispenses aid to all members of the relevant class of beneficiaries irrespective of all factors other than need.
Lord Greene MR said: ‘I come to the conclusion, therefore, that on principle a gift under which the beneficiaries are defined by reference to a purely personal relationship to a named propositus cannot on principle be a valid charitable gift. And this, I think, must be the case whether the relationship be near or distant, whether it is limited to one generation or is extended to two or three or in perpetuity. The inherent vice of the personal element is present however long the chain and the claimant cannot avoid basing his claim on it.’

Judges:

Lord Greene MR

Citations:

[1945] Ch 123, [1945] 1 All ER 198, (1945) 61 TLR 167

Cited by:

CitedDingle v Turner and Others HL 16-Feb-1972
Gift to Specified person not Charitable
The testator left part of his property on charitable trusts for the relief of the poverty of ‘the poor employees’ of a company. The appellant argued that it was not a charitable gift, and that the gift failed.
Held: The purpose will not be . .
CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 12 May 2022; Ref: scu.181253

Glasgow Corporation v Johnstone and Others (orse Johnstons): HL 1965

A house lived in by a church officer was occupied for rating purposes by the church’s congregational board which employed him, and so was not liable for full rates. Lord Hodson said: ‘The distinction is usually shortly stated in this way: if the servant is given the privilege of residing in the house of the master as part of his emoluments the occupation is that of the servant. He is treated for occupation purposes as being in the same position as that of a tenant. If, on the other hand, the servant is genuinely obliged by his Master for the purposes of his master’s business or if it is necessary for the servant to reside in the house for the performance of his services the occupation will be that of the master.’

Judges:

Lord Reid, Lord Hodson

Citations:

[1965] 2 WLR 657, [1965] AC 609

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

AppliedFox v Dalby 1874
A militia sergeant occupied a house built expressly for accommodation of persons looking after the stores and which had been assigned to him by his commanding officer.
Held: The sergeant did not occupy the house as a tenant. Brett J said: . .

Cited by:

AppliedWragg and others v Surrey County Council CA 1-Feb-2008
The Council appealed against declarations given that the respondent tenants (wildlife rangers) were entitled to purchase the freehold of their homes under right-to-buy. The Council said that the tenancies were occupied in connection with their . .
CitedKenya Aid Programme v Sheffield City Council Admn 22-Jan-2013
The claimant challenged a decision that it was liable for non domestic rates in respect of some commercial units, on the basis that the use by the charity was not itself charitable.
Held: ‘there is no reason for limiting the ambit of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Housing, Charity

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.536772

Institution of Civil Engineers v Forrest: 1890

Lord MacNaughten considered how the purpose of an institution should be considered: ‘It cannot, I think, be doubted that the Institution has raised the standard of the profession, and that to a civil engineer it is of advantage and probably of pecuniary advantage to be a member. But is that result the purpose of the Society, or is it an incidental, though an important and perhaps a necessary, consequence of the way in which the Institution does its work in the pursuit of science?’

Judges:

Lord Macnaghten

Citations:

[1890] 15 AC 334

Cited by:

CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Glasgow Police Athletic Association HL 9-Mar-1953
The House was asked whether the taxpayer association was established for ‘Charitable purposes only’ so as to benefit from tax exemptions. The association promoted sporting activities among members of the Glasgow police.
Held: Though the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.251605

Goodman v Mayor of Saltash: HL 1882

A gift was made of a right to fish to the freemen of the Borough of Saltash.
Held: The gift was as valid as a charitable gift as would be a gift to the inhabitants of the locality in general. When long and continuous enjoyment is established, a lawful origin will be presumed if it is reasonably possible.
A profit a prendre by prescription cannot be claimed by an undefined and fluctuating body of persons, not incorporated for the purpose of taking the grant.

Citations:

(1882) 7 App Cas 633

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedGibbs v Harding and others ChD 12-Jan-2007
The testatrix left a will anticipating making another. The court was asked whether a clause leaving her estate to ‘be taken over by the Diocese of Westminster to hold in trust for the Black community of Hackney’ was valid.
Held: The gift was . .
CitedRoberts v Crown Estate Commissioners CA 20-Feb-2008
The commissioners sought to claim title to a foreshore by adverse possession. The claimant asserted that he had acquired title in his capacity of Lord Marcher of Magor which had owned the bed of the estuary since the Norman Conquest, and that the . .
CitedBarton v The Church Commissioners for England ChD 15-Dec-2008
The commissioners claimed a right by prescription to all fish to be taken in a stretch of the River Wye. The claimant was to moor a barge on the river.
Held: The court explained the nature and legal status of fisheries in the law going back to . .
CitedLord Chesterfield v Harris HL 17-Jul-1911
The House considered the nature and ownership of fishing rights on the River Wye. Freeholders in adjoining parishes had been fishing a non-tidal portion of the river for centuries, not by stealth or indulgence, but openly, continuously, as of right . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Land

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.247692

Glazebrook v University of Leeds: ChD 1944

The court upheld a charitable gift despite its uncertainty.

Judges:

Uthwatt

Citations:

[1944] 1 Ch 193

Cited by:

CitedGibbs v Harding and others ChD 12-Jan-2007
The testatrix left a will anticipating making another. The court was asked whether a clause leaving her estate to ‘be taken over by the Diocese of Westminster to hold in trust for the Black community of Hackney’ was valid.
Held: The gift was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.247696

Re Clore’s Settlement Trusts: ChD 1966

A 21 year old beneficiary of a substantial trust fund requested the trustees to apply for his benefit a sum (equal to about one-seventh of the fund) to a family charitable foundation. He would be entitled to the capital of the fund on attaining 30, in default of which the capital went to his issue if any and subject thereto to his sister and her family in trust.
Held: It was open to the trustees to make the advance: i) the improvement of the material situation of the beneficiary is not confined to his direct financial situation but could include the discharge of certain moral or social obligations particularly in relation to provision for family and dependants. And ii) the court has always recognized that a wealthy person has a moral obligation to make appropriate charitable donations and that: ‘a beneficiary under a settlement may indeed in many cases be reasonably entitled to regard himself as under a moral obligation to make donations towards charity. The nature and amount of those donations must depend upon all the circumstances, including the position in life of the beneficiary, the amount of the fund and the amount of his other resources. Once that proposition is accepted, it seems to me that it must lie within the scope of a power such as that contained in clause 8 of this settlement for the trustees to raise capital for the purpose of relieving the beneficiary of his moral obligation towards whatever charity he may have in mind. If the obligation is not to be met out of the capital of the trust fund, he would have to meet it out of his own pocket, if at all. Accordingly, the discharge of the obligation out of the capital of the trust fund does improve his material situation. The precise amount which the trustees can in any given case apply for this purpose must depend, I think, on the particular circumstances, and in this respect quantum is a necessary ingredient in the proper exercise of the power. It is difficult, for example, to see how the trustees under a power such as that in clause 8 could validly pay over the whole authorized two-thirds to charitable purposes. On the other hand, it is certainly not for the court to say precisely where the line is to be drawn.’ iii) rejecting the argument that direct material advantage could only be shown if, for example, the beneficiary was under such pressure, public or otherwise, that it would be detrimental to his material position if the donation were not made, that that was: ‘too narrow a view of what represents a benefit in a material sense to the beneficiary. Once the beneficiary regards the payment as a moral obligation, then it may be for his benefit to be relieved of it.’ Earlier he said: ‘Once he recognises this obligation the trustees may properly regard it as improving his material situation to discharge the obligation out of the trust fund, and as I have said, the proportion they propose to apply for this purpose is not excessive.’

Judges:

Pennycuick J

Citations:

[1966] 1 WLR 955, [1966] 2 All ER 272

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedX v A and others ChD 29-Nov-2005
The wife sought confirmation that the trustees of a discretionary marriage settlement created by her husband could release sums which she intended to pay out for charitable purposes.
Held: The trust required money to be released for the . .
CitedJones and others v Firkin-Flood ChD 17-Oct-2008
The trustees had contracted to sell shares in a private company held within the estate. A family member now claimed that they were held in trust after a settlement of a possible challenge to the will based in lack of testamentary capacity and undue . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Charity

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.237752

Haslemere Estates Ltd v Baker: 1982

A contract for the sale of land by a charity was expressed to be subject to and conditional upon the grant of a consent before 31 March 1982 and if consent was not granted before that date then the contract was to be ‘null and void and of no further effect’. The plaintiffs registered an estate contract. The defendants, charity trustees, sought on a motion to have the registration vacated. It had been argued: ‘On that footing [that there was no unconditional contract], the question is whether the contract is a conditional contract which is registrable as an estate contract. [Counsel] contended that it was not, for a variety of reasons. First, the contract was void, or at least ineffective, because it had been made without the approval of the Charity Commissioners. Second, even if initially it was valid, it had come to an end because the Charity Commissioners had refused to approve it. Third, even if it continued to exist as a valid conditional contract, such contracts were not registrable as estate contracts.’
Held: The motion was refused. In addressing the submissions, the court reviewed the authorities and: ‘In the present case, the effect of the exchange of letters in March 1980 was that clause 2.1 of the contract operated to make all the provisions of the contract, apart from the opening words, clause 1, and clause 2.1 itself, ‘subject to and conditional upon’ the Charity Commissioners making an order under section 29 of the Charities Act 1960, authorising the governors to enter into and complete both the contract and the leases. There is a curious element of circularity here: the parties enter into an agreement that nearly all the agreement is subject to an order being made authorising the governors to do what they have done, namely, enter into the agreement. But looking at the substance, it seems plain to me that it is the Michael Richards case [1975] 3 All ER 416 that applies rather than the Milner case [1956] Ch 275, so that I do not think that the contract is invalidated by section 29(1) of the Charities Act 1960.’

Judges:

Sir Robert Megarry V-C

Citations:

[1982] 3 All ER 525, [1982] 1 WLR 1109

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedMilner v Staffordshire Congregational Union (Inc) ChD 1956
The plaintiff had contracted to buy land from a charity. The consent of the Charity Commissioners had not been obtained, but the contract was not conditional on such consent. When the charity trustess realised that consent was required they told the . .
CitedManchester Diocesan Council for Education v Commercial and General Investments Ltd 1969
The school governors were required to obtain consent before selling land formerly used as a school.
Held: The court rejected a submission that that consent was a necessary pre-requisite for a contract could be made at all: ‘Reliance is placed . .
CitedMichael Richards Properties Ltd v Corporation of Wardens of St Saviour’s Parish Southwark 1975
Property was offered for sale by tender. The tender documents contained all the detailed terms upon which the contract was to be based. The successful tender was accepted by letter, but by mistake the secretary who typed it typed in the words . .

Cited by:

CitedBayoumi v Women’s Total Abstinence Union Ltd and Another CA 5-Nov-2003
A charity entered into a contract for the sale of land. It failed to comply with the requirements under the Act. The purchaser assigned the benefit of the contract, to the claimant who sought to enforce the contract.
Held: The section only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Charity

Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.235722

In re South Place Ethical Society: 1980

The court considered the meaning and nature of religious belief, and whether a trust for this purpose could be charitable.
Held: Dillon J referred to Russell LJ as having taken the view that the court could hold that there are purposes ‘so beneficial or of such utility’ to the community that they ought prima facie to be accepted as charitable, but he observed that this approach was difficult to adopt in view of Lord Simonds’ comments in Williams’ Trustees. Religion requires ‘faith in a god and worship of that god’.

Judges:

Dillon J

Citations:

[1980] 1 WLR 1565, [1980] 3 All ER 918

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Education and Employment and others ex parte Williamson and others HL 24-Feb-2005
The appellants were teachers in Christian schools who said that the blanket ban on corporal punishment interfered with their religious freedom. They saw moderate physical discipline as an essential part of educating children in a Christian manner. . .
CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
CitedHodkin and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages SC 11-Dec-2013
The appellants sought to be married in their regular church in London. The minister would be pleased to perform the ceremony, but church to which they belonged was part of the Church of Scientology, and had been refused registration under the 1855 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Ecclesiastical, Charity

Updated: 09 May 2022; Ref: scu.223024

Oxfam v Birmingham City District Council: HL 1976

The appellant charity had the relief of poverty as its main object, a recognised ‘charitable purpose’. It operated gift shops used for sorting and selling donated articles of clothing as well as selling products made in the developing world. All of the profits of such shops were devoted to the charity’s purposes.
Held: The appeal failed. The premises were not being ‘used for charitable purposes’. Not every lawful activity of a charity is necessarily charitable. The ‘charitable purposes’ of a charity are its objects.
Lord Cross of Chelsea said that a court must: ‘[draw] the line so as to exclude from relief user for the purpose of getting in, raising or earning money for the charity, as opposed to user for purposes directly related to the achievement of the objects of the charity’.
Lord Reid said that Oxfam, therefore, was entitled to rating relief in respect of premises which it occupies and which are not being used for the actual relief of poverty of distress, if the use which it makes of them is ‘wholly ancillary to’ or ‘directly facilitates’ the carrying out of its charitable object – the relief of poverty or distress. The nub of the problem was: ‘For my part, I agree with counsel on both sides that one cannot well draw a distinction between using premises to get in money by managing existing trust property and using them to raise fresh money.’

Judges:

Lord Reid, Lord Cross of Chelsea, Lord Morris of Borth-y-Gest

Citations:

[1976] AC 126

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedKenya Aid Programme v Sheffield City Council Admn 22-Jan-2013
The claimant challenged a decision that it was liable for non domestic rates in respect of some commercial units, on the basis that the use by the charity was not itself charitable.
Held: ‘there is no reason for limiting the ambit of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Charity

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.567240

In re Koeppler’s Will Trusts, Re; Barclays Bank Trust Co plc v Slack and Others: CA 1986

A trust was established, claiming charitable status as an education trust. T (i) the conferences sought to improve the minds of the participants, not necessarily by adding to their factual knowledge but by expanding their wisdom and capacity to understand; (ii) the subjects discussed at conferences were recognised academic subjects in higher education; (iii) the conferences operated by a process of discussion designed to elicit an exchange of views in a manner familiar in places of higher education; (iv) the conferences were designed to capitalise on the expertise of participants who were there both to learn and to instruct.’
Held: The appeal was successful, and the gift was charitable.
Slade LJ said: ‘We were referred to a decision of my own in McGovern v Attorney-General [1982] Ch 321, where I held, inter alia, that though certain trusts, declared in a trust deed, for research into the observance of human rights and the dissemination of the results of such research would have been charitable if they had stood alone, they were mere adjuncts to political purposes declared by earlier provisions of the deed.
However, in the present case, as I have already mentioned, the activities of Wilton Park are not of a party political nature. Nor, so far as the evidence shows, are they designed to procure changes in the laws or governmental policy of this or any other country: even when they touch on political matters, they constitute, so far as I can see, no more than genuine attempts in an objective manner to ascertain and disseminate the truth. In these circumstances I think that no objections to the trust arise on a political score, similar to those which arose in the McGovern case. The trust is, in my opinion, entitled to what is sometimes called ‘benignant construction’, in the sense that the court is entitled to presume that the trustees will act only in a lawful and proper manner appropriate to the trustees of a charity and not, for example, by the propagation of tendentious political opinions, any more than those running the Wilton Park project so acted in the 33 years preceding the testator’s death: compare McGovern v Attorney-General, at p.353E-F.’

Judges:

Slade, Robert Goff, O’Connor LJJ

Citations:

[ 1986] Ch 423

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Charity

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.556778

In Re Bushnell (Deceased); Lloyds Bank Ltd and others v Murray and others: 1975

The court considered the charitable status of a trust established for the teaching of Socialised Medicine included demonstrating that ‘the full advantage of Socialised Medicine can only be enjoyed in a Socialist State’.
Held: A charitable purpose must not be propagandist. The public must be presented with neutral information so that they can choose for themselves. Goulding J said: ‘I am quite unable to avoid the conclusion that the main or dominant or essential object is a political one. The testator never for a moment, as I read his language, desired to educate the public so that they could choose for themselves, starting with neutral information, to support or oppose what he called ‘socialised medicine’. I think he was trying to promote his own theory of education, if you will by propaganda, but I do not attach any importance to that word.’

Judges:

Goulding J

Citations:

[1975] 1 WLR 1596, [1975] 1 All ER 721

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Charity

Updated: 08 May 2022; Ref: scu.556772

In re Wykes, deceased; Riddington v Spencer: 1961

When looking a the definition section of a statute, the presumption in law that Parliament would be especially precise and careful in its choice of language, is stronger.

Judges:

Buckley J

Citations:

[1961] Ch 229, [1961] 1 All ER 471

Statutes:

Charitable Trusts (Validation) Act 1954

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedUlrich v Treasury Solicitor and Others ChD 28-Jan-2005
A fund was set up before the 1954 Act. Its objects were not entirley charitable, being for the employees of a company. The trustees appealed refusal of a declaration that it was charitable.
Held: The intention was to apply the funds for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.224376

In re Koeppler’s Will Trusts, Re; Barclays Bank Trust Co plc v Slack and Others: ChD 1985

The gift was for purposes which could be described as ‘the Wilton Park project’. Where an organisation’s purposes are said to be educational, practical matters that can be relevant include the degree of objectivity involved. Here, the trust fostered the input of participants.
Held: the gift was charitable.

Judges:

Peter Gibson J

Citations:

[1985] 2 All ER 869, [1985] 3 WLR 765, [1986] Ch 423

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Charity

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.556777

Joseph Rowntree Memorial Trust Housing Association Ltd v Attorney-General: 1983

Housing associations wished to build self-contained dwellings for sale to the elderly. The court was asked whether such activity would be charitable in nature.
Held: The proposed schemes were charitable. They were for the relief of the aged, and remained charitable even though individuals would benefit.
Peter Gibson J discussed the compatibility of gifts benefitting individuals with the trust being charitable: ‘The third objection was that the schemes were for the benefit of private individuals and not for a charitable class. I cannot accept that. The schemes are for the benefit of a charitable class, that is to say the aged having certain needs requiring relief therefrom. The fact that, once the association and the trust have selected individuals to benefit from the housing, those individuals are identified private individuals does not seem to me to make the purpose in providing the housing a non-charitable one any more than a trust for the relief of poverty ceases to be a charitable purpose when individual poor recipients of bounty are selected.’

Judges:

Peter Gibson J

Citations:

[1983] Ch 159, [1983] 1 All ER 288

Cited by:

CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Housing

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.464224

Re Sanders: 1954

A legacy to provide dwellings for the working classes and their families resident in the area of Pembroke Dock or within a radius of five miles, with preference for dockworkers and their families, was not a charitable bequest, because the class of beneficiaries was not limited to those who in terms of the law of charity were poor.

Judges:

Harman J

Citations:

[1954] Ch 265

Cited by:

CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.464223

In re Macduff; Macduff v Macduff: CA 1896

Lindley LJ qualified the judgment of Lord Macnaghten in Pemsel: ‘Now Sir Samuel Romilly did not mean, and I am certain Lord Macnaghten did not mean, to say that every object of public general utility must necessarily be a charity. Some may be, and some may not be.’ Applications of monies for public philanthropic or benevolent purposes would be for the public good but would not necessarily be legally charitable.

Judges:

Lindley LJ

Citations:

(1896) 2 Ch 451

Citing:

ExplainedIncome Tax Special Commissioners v Pemsel HL 20-Jul-1891
Charitable Purposes used with technical meaning
The House was asked whether, in a taxing statute applying to the whole of the United Kingdom and allowing for deductions from and allowances against the income of land vested in trustees for charitable purposes, the words ‘charitable purposes’ . .

Cited by:

CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.463855

The Attorney General v Price: 26 Nov 1810

Devise to A and his heirs; with a direction, that yearly he and his heirs shall for ever divide and distribute according to his and their discretion amongst the testator’s poor kinsmen and kinswomen, and amongst their offspring and issue dwelling within the County of B. andpound;20 by the year. This is in the nature of a charitable bequest ; and, the Will being made in 1581, was sustained; and inquiries directed as to the poor relations dwelling within the county of B.

Citations:

[1810] EngR 575, (1810) 17 Ves Jun 371, (1810) 34 ER 143

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

CitedScarisbrick’s Will Trusts, In re ChD 1950
The court considered whether a trust was charitable.
Held: The distinction lay in whether the gift took the form of a trust under which capital was retained and the income only applied for the benefit of the objects, in which case the gift was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Wills and Probate

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.335760

The Attorney-General v St Cross Hospital: 24 Feb 1854

The Attorney-General attends the settlement of a scheme of a charity to protect the interests of all, and the Court refused to allow a member of a corporation, consisting of a master and thirteen brethren, to attend the settlement of a scheme of the chanty, even at his own expense.

Citations:

[1854] EngR 303, (1854) 18 Beav 475, (1854) 52 ER 187

Links:

Commonlii

Charity

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.293160

Hobourn Aero Components Limited’s Air Raid Distress Fund: 1946

Voluntary collections from employees of the munition factories belonging to a certain company were to be used to relieve without a means test the distress suffered by the employees from air raids.
Held: This was not a charity.

Judges:

Cohen J

Citations:

[1946] 1 Ch 87

Cited by:

Appeal fromHobourn Aero Components Limited’s Air Raid Distress Fund CA 2-Jan-1946
The trust sought charitable exemption for sums collected voluntarily from workers in a munitions factory for the benefit of co-workers who had suffered in the Blitz. The judge had found the trusts not to be charitable.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Glasgow Police Athletic Association HL 9-Mar-1953
The House was asked whether the taxpayer association was established for ‘Charitable purposes only’ so as to benefit from tax exemptions. The association promoted sporting activities among members of the Glasgow police.
Held: Though the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.251602

In Re Dominion Students’ Hall Trust: 1947

A trust deed imposed a ‘colour bar’.
Held: The court upheld a scheme which removed the bar. However, notionally there could be two complementary charities ‘one for white and one for coloured students’. These notional trusts were not being incompatible with charitable objects.

Judges:

Evershed J

Citations:

[1947] Ch 183

Cited by:

CitedGibbs v Harding and others ChD 12-Jan-2007
The testatrix left a will anticipating making another. The court was asked whether a clause leaving her estate to ‘be taken over by the Diocese of Westminster to hold in trust for the Black community of Hackney’ was valid.
Held: The gift was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Discrimination

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.247697

In re Orphan Working School and Alexandra Orphanage’s Contract: 1912

An established trust had collected subscriptions over many years, ptting those subscriptions wth other funds derived from the sale of one school property for the purchase of another. That property in turn came to be sold, and questions arose as to the need for permission of the Charity Commissioners under the 1835 Act.
Held: Inter alia, that the Trustees of the charity had implied the authority of the donors to select the trusts for the charity, and that the land sale was derived from a donation to a mixed charity and could be applied as income, and as such was exempt from control by the Commissioners.

Judges:

Parker J

Citations:

[1912] 2 Ch 167, [1912] 81 LJ Ch 627, (1912) 107 LT 254

Statutes:

Charititable Trusts Act 1835

Citing:

ConsideredAttorney-General v Mathieson CA 1907
The Rev John Wilkinson, ran charities in Stoke Newington in London, including ‘the Mildmay Mission to the Jews’. He was given received andpound;1350 from ‘a lady’ locally who suggested that the money be used for a convalescent home. He pointed out . .

Cited by:

CitedShergill and Others v Khaira and Others SC 11-Jun-2014
The parties disputed the trusts upon which three Gurdwaras (Sikh Temples) were held. The Court of Appeal had held that the issues underlying the dispute were to be found in matters of the faith of the Sikh parties, and had ordered a permanent stay. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Trusts

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.543043

Jeeves v Imperial Foods Ltd, Pension Scheme: ChD 27 Jan 1986

Walton J explained that there may be many ‘occasions in law in which a fund is held on trust, but at the particular point there is no final definitive trust deed’. He went on to say that ‘it may very well be that . . a person who had contributed to the fund in question would be in a position to object to some provision which was never contemplated, but which was put or attempted to be put into the final trust deed’.

Judges:

Walton J

Citations:

Unreported, 27 January 1986

Citing:

CitedAttorney-General v Mathieson CA 1907
The Rev John Wilkinson, ran charities in Stoke Newington in London, including ‘the Mildmay Mission to the Jews’. He was given received andpound;1350 from ‘a lady’ locally who suggested that the money be used for a convalescent home. He pointed out . .

Cited by:

CitedShergill and Others v Khaira and Others SC 11-Jun-2014
The parties disputed the trusts upon which three Gurdwaras (Sikh Temples) were held. The Court of Appeal had held that the issues underlying the dispute were to be found in matters of the faith of the Sikh parties, and had ordered a permanent stay. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Trusts

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.543045

Regina v The Imam of Bury Park Mosque, Luton and others ex parte Suliman Ali: ChD 30 Aug 1951

Application was made for judicial review of a decision as to the governance of a Mosque.
Held: The application was not justiciable, in that the role played by the Imam did not contain an element of public law so as to attract the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court. Auld J said: ‘In short, the issues raised involve an examination of religious law and the custom and traditions of a particular local religious community which the court is not competent to undertake’.
He continued to say that had he reached a different conclusion on this jurisdictional point, he would still have dismissed the application because the applicant had not made out, on the evidence, the grounds for judicial review set out in the application, namely partiality and malice on the part of the Imam because he was an employee or appointee of the existing executive committee.

Judges:

Auld J

Citations:

Unreported, 30 Aug 1951

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v The Imam of Bury Park Mosque, Luton and others ex parte Sualiman Ali CA 12-May-1993
The court had been asked to intervene in an internal dispute as to the role of an Imam in a mosque community.
Held: The request was denied. The case was not one of public law: ‘ the particular function which the Imam was performing affected . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.542959

Church of the New Faith v Commissioner of Pay-Roll Tax: 1983

(Victoria) Under the Victoria Pay-roll Tax Act 1971, there was an exemption from tax payable under the Act for wages paid by a religious institution. The question considered by the High Court was ‘whether the beliefs, practices and observances which were established by the affidavits and oral evidence as the set of beliefs, practices and observances accepted by Scientologists, are properly to be described as a religion.’
Held: They were. The area of conduct is excluded from the area of legal immunity marked out by the concept of religion if it offends against the ordinary laws: that is, if it offends against laws which do not discriminate against religion generally, or against particular religions or against conduct of a kind which is characteristic only of a religion.
‘We would therefore hold that, for the purposes of the law, the criteria of religion are twofold: first, belief in a supernatural Being, Thing or Principle; and second, the acceptance of canons of conduct in order to give effect to that belief, though canons of conduct which offend against the ordinary laws are outside the area of any immunity, privilege or right conferred on the grounds of religion.’

Judges:

Brennan J, Acting Chief Justice Mason

Citations:

(1983) 154 CLR 136

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedHodkin and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages SC 11-Dec-2013
The appellants sought to be married in their regular church in London. The minister would be pleased to perform the ceremony, but church to which they belonged was part of the Church of Scientology, and had been refused registration under the 1855 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Ecclesiastical

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.540528

Hampshire County Council v Attorney General: ChD 1994

The Council wished to dispose of two plots of land. In each case the land had been provided many years ago to build schools on. In the first case, the land had been conveyed to a school board ‘upon trust for the purposes of a public elementary school’. In the second, it was conveyed to a school board ‘by way of free gift for the purposes of a site for an elementary school’. The council argued that the trusts were not charitable.
Held: Each plot was held on charitable trusts. The first conveyance had been at an undervalue, and so constituted a bounty. Though no express charitable trust had been created, this was exactly the situation where a donor might have insisted on a charitable trust, and the presumption of regularity should be used to remedy any defect. The second conveyance was a gift and so a good reason for a charitable trust was created.

Judges:

Millett J

Citations:

[1994] NPC 62

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Charity, Land

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.517443

In Re James: 1932

A legacy for the setting up and operation of a home of rest for the sisters of a religious community was a valid charitable bequest, on the basis that it was to be provided for persons in need of such a facility or amenity.

Judges:

Farwell J

Citations:

[1932] 2 Ch 25

Cited by:

CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.464221

Lehtimaki 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 obtained, but the court ordered the remaining non-interested director to vote in favour of the transaction. He appealed successfully against that order, and W now herself appealed.
Held: The appeal raised several issues.
Lady Arden discussed whether L was a fiduciary when acting as a member of CIFF. The defining characteristic of a fiduciary is that he has a single duty to his trustor. A member of a charitable company has that duty, the company itself being in a position of trustee. The position of the member was as under a trust given shape by statute and the company’s own constitution.
The application having been made to the court to approve such an arrangement, the Court’s answer governed the decision on what was in the charity’s best interests, and therefore the member no longer retained discretion to vote against it, and had to work to implement it. If the member disagreed, his remedy was to appeal.
Lady Arden, dissenting, saying that the fiduciary duty was in its nature subjective, and could not be ousted in favour of an objective direction.
Lady Arden confirmed the capacity of the Court to direct a member’s vote under section 217 of the 2006 Act.
Otherwise: Children’s Investment Fund (UK) v Attorney General

Judges:

Lord Reed, President, Lord Wilson, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Kitchin

Citations:

[2020] UKSC 33, [2020] 2 BCLC 463, [2020] 3 WLR 461, [2020] WTLR 967, 23 ITELR 273, [2021] 1 All ER (Comm) 757, [2021] 1 All ER 809, [2022] AC 155

Links:

Bailii, Press Summary, Issues and Facts

Statutes:

Companies Act 2006 217, Charities Act 2011 201

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedIn re The French Protestant Hospital ChD 1951
The charity was an incorporated body created by a Royal Charter granted in 1718. The governor and directors sought to exercise a power conferred on them by the charter to amend the byelaws to enable the directors’ professional firms to be . .
CitedVon Ernst and Cie SA v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1979
The assets of a corporate charity were held on charitable trusts: ‘We were referred to certain authorities which give support to the view that a company incorporated for exclusively charitable purposes is in the position of a trustee of its funds or . .
CitedLiverpool and District Hospital for Diseases of the Heart v Attorney-General ChD 1981
Charitable Company is Trustee of Assets
The court was asked as to the distribution of surplus assets of a charitable company which was in winding up, and the question whether or not s 257 et seq. Companies Act 1948 applied, including s 265 which made provision for the distribution of . .
CitedThe Attorney-General, at The Relation of W Izard v Brown, And Forty-Seven Others 3-Apr-1818
The Crown has a role as parens patriae or protector of charities.
Lord Eldon LC said: ‘It is the duty of the King, as parens patriae, to protect property devoted to charitable uses; and that duty is executed by the officer who represents the . .
CitedJohn Shaw and Sons (Salford) Ltd v Shaw 1935
The members of a company cannot interfere with the decisions of the trustees and directors unless they amend the articles to enable them to do so. . .
CitedRe Egerton Trust Retirement Benefit Scheme ChD 2000
(No Date) Robert Walker J identified four categories of case in which the court has to consider actions taken or to be taken by trustees, as follows:-
‘ . . it seems to me that, when the court has to adjudicate on a course of action proposed . .
CitedPublic Trustee v Cooper 2001
The court looked at the circumstances required when a court was asked to approve a proposed exercise by trustees of a discretion vested in them. The second category of circumstances was (quoting Robert Walker J): ‘Where the issue was whether the . .
At First InstanceThe Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (UK) v Attorney General and Others ChD 9-Jun-2017
The court considered the propriety of a payment made by a charitable company to a director for her loss of office. The charity was to transfer a substantial sum to a new charity headed by the departing director.
Held: The court approved the . .
Appeal from (CA)Lehtimaki v The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (UK) and Others CA 6-Jul-2018
A charity established by H and W wanted to transfer part of its fund to a new charity headed by W in return for her resignation from the first charity on the breakdown of the marriage. Court approval was sought for a transfer, but the remaining . .
CitedHope Community Church (Wymondham) v Phelan and Others ChD 22-May-2020
The Church, a private company limited by guarantee, sought a declaration that it had the right to enfranchise its church premises under the 1920 Act. . .
CitedPender v Lushington CA 1877
After stating that the Court would not restrain the exercise of certain votes by members of a company merely because the holder of the votes had a motive for voting them which the Court might not approve, his Lordship said: ‘I am confirmed in that . .
CitedThe North-West Transportation Company and James Hughes Beatty v Henry Beatty and Others PC 21-Jul-1887
(Canada) . .
CitedAllan v Gold Reefs of West Africa Ltd CA 19-Feb-1900
The company had altered its articles so as to give itself a lien on paid up shares in respect of the failure of the shareholder to pay calls on other shares which had not been fully paid up. The effect of the amendment was to alter the contractual . .
CitedArbuthnott v Bonnyman and Others CA 20-May-2015
Appeal from refusal of unfair prejudice petition.
After listing cases: ‘I would extract from them the following principles:
(1) The limitations on the exercise of the power to amend a company’s articles arise because, as in the case of . .
CitedNorthern Counties Securities Ltd v Jackson and Steeple Ltd ChD 1974
Walton J reiterated that, when a shareholder is voting for or against a particular resolution, he is voting as a person owing no fiduciary duty to the company and who is exercising his own right of property to vote as he thinks fit. . .
CitedLetterstedt v Broers PC 22-Mar-1884
(Supreme Court of the Cape of Good Hope) Lack of harmony may be of itself a good reason for a trustee to resign or be dismissed. Lord Blackburn approved a passage in Story’s Equity Jurisprudence, s 1289: ‘But in cases of positive misconduct, courts . .
CitedBolton v Madden QBD 25-Nov-1873
The Court of Queen’s Bench on appeal from the Lord Mayor’s Court held that they could ‘find no legal principle to justify us in holding that the subscriber to a charity may not give his votes as he pleases’. Blackburn J said that ‘The general rule . .
CitedSEC v Chenery Corporation 1-Feb-1943
(United States Supreme Court) Frankfurter J held: ‘to say that a man is a fiduciary only begins analysis; it gives direction to further inquiry. To whom is he a fiduciary? What obligations does he owe as a fiduciary?’ . .
CitedGoldcorp Exchange Ltd and others v Liggett and others PC 25-May-1994
(New Zealand) The non allocated claimants purchased gold bullion from a company for future delivery on a non allocated basis. The company stored and insured the metal, but the claimants had a right to call for delivery of their part within 7-days. . .
CitedBolton v Madden QBD 25-Nov-1873
The Court of Queen’s Bench on appeal from the Lord Mayor’s Court held that they could ‘find no legal principle to justify us in holding that the subscriber to a charity may not give his votes as he pleases’. Blackburn J said that ‘The general rule . .
CitedMothew (T/a Stapley and Co) v Bristol and West Building Society CA 24-Jul-1996
The solicitor, acting in a land purchase transaction for his lay client and the plaintiff, had unwittingly misled the claimant by telling the claimant that the purchasers were providing the balance of the purchase price themselves without recourse . .
CitedF and C Alternative Investments (Holdings) Ltd v Barthelemy and Another (No 2) ChD 14-Jul-2011
The court was asked as to the fiduciary obligations owed by members of the board of a limited liability company.
Held: Sales J said that: ‘there is nothing in the Act to qualify the usual fiduciary obligations which an agent owes his principal . .
CitedGrimaldi v Chameleon Mining NL (No 2) 21-Feb-2012
Federal Court of Australia
CORPORATIONS – Corporations Act 2001 (Cth), s 9 – ‘director’ – ‘officer’ – de facto director – no single test for determining whether a person is such – assuming or performing the functions of a director of the . .
CitedChinachem Charitable Foundation Ltd v The Secretary for Justice 18-May-2015
(Court of Final Appeal of Hong Kong) Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe NPJ referred to a proposed scheme as ‘a written instrument approved by the court to regulate, in whole or in part, the future management and administration of the trust’ . .
CitedIncome Tax Special Commissioners v Pemsel HL 20-Jul-1891
Charitable Purposes used with technical meaning
The House was asked whether, in a taxing statute applying to the whole of the United Kingdom and allowing for deductions from and allowances against the income of land vested in trustees for charitable purposes, the words ‘charitable purposes’ . .
CitedNational Anti-Vivisection League v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 2-Jul-1947
The main object of the Society was political viz, the repeal of the Cruelty to Animals Act 1876, and for that reason the Society was not established for charitable purposes only and was not entitled to exemption from tax. An organisation whose aims . .
CitedConstruction Industry Training Board v Attorney-General CA 1973
The principal issue was whether a body set up by statute and subject to the control of a minister of the Crown was a ‘charity’ within the meaning of section 45(1) of the Charities Act 1960, for which purpose it had to be subject to ‘the control of . .
CitedArmitage v Nurse; etc CA 19-Mar-1997
A clause in a trust deed may validly excuse trustees from personal liability for even gross negligence. The trustee was exempted from liability for loss or damage ‘unless such loss or damage shall be caused by his own actual fraud’.
Held: The . .
CitedGaudiya Mission and others v Brahmachary CA 30-Jul-1997
The High Court had found the plaintiff to be a charity, and ordered the Attorney-General to be joined in. The A-G appealed that order saying that the plaintiff was not a charity within the 1993 Act. The charity sought to spread the Vaishnava . .
CitedEx Parte Lacey 5-Feb-1802
Trustee Not To purchase Property of Trust
Lord Eldon held that equity imposed stringent duties on persons who were appointed trustees of trusts and that these duties were imposed with ‘relentless jealousy’ in order to ensure that trustees fulfilled their duties, and that trustees had to be . .
CitedCitibank Na and Another v QVT Financial Lp CA 22-Jan-2007
Securitisation of Channel Tunnel debts.
The controlling noteholder of a series of notes issued by the company and secured by a trust deed argued that its extensive powers, while its notes remained outstanding, to direct the trustee of the . .
CitedStanway v Attorney-General CA 5-Apr-2000
Sir Richard Scott V-C said: ‘Charities operate within a framework of public law, not private law. The Crown is parens patriae of the charity and the judges of the courts represent the Crown in supervising what the charity is doing and in giving . .
CitedArklow Investments Ltd and Another v Maclean and Others PC 1-Dec-1999
PC (New Zealand) Land was offered for sale. A potential buyer, the appellant was approached by a merchant bank with a proposal for finance. When he sought finance elsewhere, a company associated with the bank . .
CitedAssenagon Asset Management Sa v Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd ChD 27-Jul-2012
The court considered the right of a company member to vote as he wishes. Briggs J said: ‘The basis for the application of that principle in relation to powers conferred on majorities to bind minorities is traditionally described as arising from . .
CitedThe Attorney-General v The Dean and Canons of Christ Church CA 28-Mar-1822
Devise to the Dean and Canons of Christ Church in trust to constitute and support a grammar school at P, to appoint a master and usher, and pay them certain salaries; and the Dean and Canons to direct the management of the school.
Held: 1 That . .
CitedAttorney-General v The Bishop Of Worcester 8-Nov-1851
If a scheme for the regulation of a charity, settled by a decree, does not operate beneficially for the charity, and the attorney-general considers that the interests of the charity would, consistently with the foundation, usage and law, be promoted . .
CitedGirls Public Day School Trust v Minister of Community and Country Planning ChD 1951
A company was formed for the purpose of establishing in England, public day schools for the education of girls. The position on the day appointed by the minister of Town and Country planning under the 1947 Act, section 119, namely July 18th 1948, . .
CitedChapman v Chapman HL 25-Mar-1954
It was suggested to the House that: ‘A judge of the Chancery Division of the High Court of Justice has an inherent jurisdiction, in the execution of the trusts of a settlement, to sanction, on behalf of infant beneficiaries and unborn persons, a . .
CitedRe Royal Society’s Charitable Trusts 1956
The Society, a charitable company regulated by statute, requested that it be permitted inter alia, to consolidate various different trust funds of which it was trustee for investment and accounting purposes.
Held: The application did not come . .
CitedIn re J W Laing Trust ChD 1984
The trust was first created in 1922 with a gift of 15,000 shares worth pounds 15,000 ‘the proceeds of which and the dividends thereon from time to time declared and paid … to be devoted to charitable purposes, it being understood that the capital . .
CitedIn re Steed CA 26-Jan-1960
The court considered an application under the 1968 Act to vary a trust. The testator had shown in the terms of his will a particular purpose in creating a protective trust; that was to protect the life tenant from improvident dealings with property . .
CitedRe Ashton Charity CA 3-May-1856
The Court of Chancery has jurisdiction to alien the real estate of a charity, and it can do so upon an application under Sir Samuel Romilly’s Act: ‘upon an information, the Court of Chancery has a general jurisdiction, as incident to the . .
CitedThe Attorney-General v The Governors Of The Free Grammar School Of Queen Elizabeth In Dedham The Attorney-General v Ellis The Attorney-General v Grignon In The Matters Of The 52 Geo 3, C 101, The Charitable Trusts Act, 1853, And Of The Several Speci 30-Jan-1857
The jurisdiction of the court was not ousted where the charity obtained a charter subsequent to its founding . .
CitedEx Parte The Governors Of Christ’s Hospital 10-Dec-1864
. .
CitedAttorney General v British Museum ChD 27-May-2005
The trustees brought a claim against the Attorney-General seeking clarification of their duties and powers to return objects which were part of the collection in law, but where a moral duty might exist to return it to a former owner. Here drawings . .
CitedClephane and Others v Magistrates of Edinburgh SCS 30-Oct-1869
This case came before the Court on a petition by the defenders, dated 21st May 1869, to apply the judgment of the House of Lords. The Kirk-session lodged a minute, asserting their interest in the matter, and craving to be sisted as parties to the . .
CitedAndrews v McGuffog 1886
Applications to court – partial decree not granted – directions where scheme of founder cannot be carried out – commingling of different funds
Pursuers in an actio popularis in re a public trust have no right to demand a partial decree which . .
CitedHampden v Buckinghamshire (Earl of) ChD 24-Apr-1893
(ChD and CA) By sect. 11 of the Settled Land Act, 1890 (which Act and the Settled Land Act, 1882, are to be read and construed together as one Act): ‘Where money is required for the purpose of discharging an incumbrance on the settled land or part . .
CitedAttorney-General v Governors of Christ’s Hospital 3-Mar-1896
The Attorney-General proposed a scheme to except certain endowments from the 1869 Act. They would be made over to another governing body in augmentation of the endowments held by them subject to the provisions of that Act.
Held: The court . .
CitedRoyal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v Attorney-General and others ChD 26-Jan-2001
The right to freedom of association could be exercised by a society choosing to remove from its membership individuals who held views which it saw as inimical to its purposes. Such a removal did not infringe the members’ rights of freedom of speech. . .
CitedIn re Steed CA 26-Jan-1960
The court considered an application under the 1968 Act to vary a trust. The testator had shown in the terms of his will a particular purpose in creating a protective trust; that was to protect the life tenant from improvident dealings with property . .
CitedIn re S (an infant) CA 1965
A boy was received into the care of the local authority in 1954, when he was 5 weeks old. The local authority entrusted him to foster parents, who signed an agreement that the boy could be removed from them when required by an authorised person. In . .
CitedAttorney General v Haberdashers’ Company 7-May-1791
Where a surplus to be distributed is an uncertain sum, the Master ought to report the shares in aliquot parts, not in money. The only way of administering a charity is under general direction to trustees; in case of misbehaviour there must be a new . .
CitedAttorney-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, . .
CitedRandell, In re; Randell v Dixon ChD 10-Feb-1888
A testatrix bequeathed pounds 14,000 on trust to pay the income to the incumbent of the church at H. for the time being so long as he permitted the sittings to be occupied free : in case payment for sittings was ever demanded, she directed the . .
CitedGarnham v PC and Others 13-Mar-2012
(Royal Court – Samedi) . .
CitedCowan v Scargill and Others ChD 13-Apr-1984
Trustee’s duties in relation to investments
Within the National Coal Board Pension scheme, the trustees appointed by the NCB were concerned at the activities of the trustees of the miners, and sought directions from the court. The defendants refused to allow any funds to be invested abroad. . .
CitedMcPhail v Doulton (on appeal from In re Baden’s Deed Trusts) HL 6-May-1970
The settlor asked whether the test for validity, in point of certainty of objects, is the same for trusts and powers, or whether the test for trusts is more demanding.
Held: The test is the same. The context was a provision, held to be a . .

Cited by:

CitedButler-Sloss and Others v The Charity Commission for England and Wales and Another ChD 29-Apr-2022
Principles allowing Ethical Investment by Trustees
Should charities, whose principal purposes are environmental protection and improvement and the relief of poverty, be able to adopt an investment policy that excludes many potential investments because the trustees consider that they conflict with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Company

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.652834

Gaudiya Mission and others v Brahmachary: CA 30 Jul 1997

The High Court had found the plaintiff to be a charity, and ordered the Attorney-General to be joined in. The A-G appealed that order saying that the plaintiff was not a charity within the 1993 Act. The charity sought to spread the Vaishnava religion in London.
Held: Charities Act jurisdiction is restricted to charities registered in the UK, with no control over charities established and administered abroad. The Mission was not a charity within the meaning of the 1993 Act.
Mummery LJ observed that: ‘Under English law charity has always received special treatment. It often takes the form of a trust; but it is a public trust for the promotion of purposes beneficial to the community, not a trust for private individuals. It is therefore subject to special rules governing registration, administration, taxation and duration. Although not a state institution, a charity is subject to the constitutional protection of the Crown as parens patriae, acting through the Attorney-General, to the state supervision of the Charity Commissioners, and to the judicial supervision of the High Court. This regime applies whether the charity takes the form of a trust or of an incorporated body’.

Judges:

Lord Justice Leggatt Lord Justice Morritt Lord Justice Mummery

Citations:

Times 24-Sep-1997, [1998] Ch 341, [1997] EWCA Civ 2239

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Charities Act 1993 33 96(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromGaudiya Mission and Others v Kamalaksha Das Brahmachary ChD 14-Mar-1997
There was a dispute as to the management and ownership of the London Temple of the plaintiff, a Vaishnava religious sect in India.
Held: The proceedings were charity proceedings within section 33(8), because they are proceedings brought under . .
CitedMayor of Lyons v East India Co PC 12-Dec-1836
Lord Brougham said: ‘The objection, in the ordinary case, to administering a foreign charity under the superintendence of the Court, is this: those who are engaged in the actual execution of it, are beyond the Court’s control, and those who are . .
CitedClark (Inspector of Taxes) v Oceanic Contractors Inc HL 16-Dec-1982
HL Income tax, Schedule E – Non-resident employer – Employees working in U.K. sector of North Sea – Whether employer liable to deduct tax from emoluments – Income Tax (Employments) Regulations 1973 – Income and . .
DistinguishedConstruction Industry Training Board v Attorney-General CA 1973
The principal issue was whether a body set up by statute and subject to the control of a minister of the Crown was a ‘charity’ within the meaning of section 45(1) of the Charities Act 1960, for which purpose it had to be subject to ‘the control of . .
CitedProvost of Edinburgh v Aubery 1754
The English court declined the jurisdiction for the distribution of a fund of 3,500 pounds bequeathed by the testator to the Provost of Edinburgh to be applied for the maintenance of poor labourers residing in Edinburgh and towns adjacent. He said . .
CitedRe Marr’s Will Trusts 1936
. .
CitedAttorney-General v Lepine 1818
The testator left part of his residuary estate for the benefit of a school for the poor in the parish of Dollar in Scotland.
Held: The English court declined jurisdiction. ‘I have always understood that, where a charity is to be administered . .
CitedIn Re Robinson; Besant v German Reich ChD 1931
The claim concerned a gift which had been made to the German government for the benefit of disabled German soldiers.
Held: The English court had no jurisdiction: ‘if the trustee is abroad there is no power in the Court to direct a scheme to be . .
CitedEmery v Hill 14-Feb-1826
The Court was asked to make an order with respect to a bequest to the treasurer of a society established in Scotland for the propagation of Christian knowledge.
Held: The English court had no jurisdiction over a Scottish charity. . .
CitedForbes v Forbes 3-Mar-1854
General Forbes died. It became necessary to decide what was his domicile at the date of death. He had been born in Scotland, but then served for 35 years in India, before retirng to live in London.
Held: The domicile in India was a domicile of . .
CitedAttorney-General v Sturge 4-Nov-1854
The testatrix had left funds to support a school in Genoa.
Held: The courts have no authority to make a scheme where the trustees would not be within the jurisdiction of the English courts. . .
CitedRe Colonial Bishoprics Fund 1841 1935
The court was asked to make a order with respect to the Fund, a trust established in England for the endowment of Bishoprics in the Colonies.
Held: The court had jurisdiction to make a cy-pres order. Since the trustees of the fund were in this . .
CitedAttorney-General v City of London 1790
A trust had been established in England for the advancement of Christianity among ‘infidels in America’. Acting on information that after the American War of Independence, there were no longer any infidels within the areas designated, and that the . .
CitedCamille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1956
The company was a foreign corporation constituted according to the laws of the state of New York for objects which were exclusively charitable according to the law of the United Kingdom.
Held: The term ‘charity’ does not include an institution . .
CitedCamille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1954
The Court considered whether it had jurisdiction to make an order with respect to a company registered in New York for objects which were charitable according to the laws of England.
Held: The Revenue’s appeal against a finding that the . .
DoubtedRe Duncan CA 1867
The court was asked whether the consent of the Charity Commissioners was necessary to petition the Court to appoint a new trustee of a charity established in England to promote Christian education in Jamaica.
Held: In the 1853 Act, ‘Charity’ . .

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 . .
CitedButler-Sloss and Others v The Charity Commission for England and Wales and Another ChD 29-Apr-2022
Principles allowing Ethical Investment by Trustees
Should charities, whose principal purposes are environmental protection and improvement and the relief of poverty, be able to adopt an investment policy that excludes many potential investments because the trustees consider that they conflict with . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 04 May 2022; Ref: scu.142636

Morice v The Bishop of Durham: 1789

Citations:

[1789] EngR 1593, (1789-1817) 2 Ves Jun Supp 177, (1789) 34 ER 1046 (F)

Links:

Commonlii

Statutes:

Statute of Charitable Uses 1601

Cited by:

See AlsoMorice v The Bishop of Durham 1789
. .
See AlsoMorice v The Bishop of Durham 1789
. .
See AlsoMorice v The Bishop of Durham CA 26-Mar-1804
Bequest, in trust for such objects of benevolence and liberality as the trustee in his own discretion shall most approve, cannot be supported as a charitable Legacy ; and is therefore a Trust for the next of kin.
Ann Cracherade by her Will, . .
See AlsoMorice v Bishop of Durham HL 1805
The court was asked whether a gift of residue to be applied ‘to such objects of benevolence and liberality as the Bishop of Durham in his own discretion shall most approve of’ was valid as being confined to purposes that were charitable.
Held: . .
See AlsoMorice v The Bishop of Durham 20-Mar-1805
. .
See AlsoMorice v The Bishop of Durham 21-Jun-1805
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.367224

Attorney-General v The Painter-Stainers Company: 31 Oct 1788

On further directions – Where an intention appears in a testator to give the whole of a fund to a charity, the objects whereof are not sufficient to exhaust the whole, the Court will apply the residue as nearly to the testator’s designation as it can. But such defects will not be supplied without some such intention appearing to guide the Court, which cannot go so far as to dispose of a fund merely on seeing a general intention in the testator to die testate as to the whole

Citations:

[1788] EngR 210, (1788) 2 Cox 51, (1788) 30 ER 24 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Wills and Probate, Charity

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.368510

Attorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company: 18 Nov 1834

A testator gave the residue of his estate to trustees, positively forbidding them to diminish the capital thereof, or that the interest and profit arising be applied to any other use or uses than thereinafter directed ; and he proceeded to direct one moiety of the income to be applied to a charitable purpose which failed; and the other moiety to be applied to other specified charitable purposes. Held, upon appeal, that the Court had jurisdiction to apply cypres the income of the moiety devoted to the charitable purpose which failed.

Citations:

[1834] EngR 1042, (1833-1834) 2 My and K 576, (1834) 39 ER 1064

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

See AlsoAttorney-General v Ironmongers’ Company 3-Jun-1837
Scheme for application of a charity fund left for loans to young freemen of a company and of the interest. . .
See AlsoAttorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company Betton’s Charity 14-Feb-1840
Bequest of residue to a company, to apply the interest of a moiety ‘unto the redemption of British slaves in Turkey or Barbary,’ one-fourth to charity schools in London and its suburbs; and in consideration of the care and pains of the company, the . .
See AlsoThe Attorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company 23-Jan-1841
Under a, reference to approve a scheme for the application of charity funds, the Master has no authority to allow, still less to invite, any person to intervene in the inquiry, who is not a party to the cause. If any such person is desirous of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.317718

Attorney-General v Ironmongers’ Company: 3 Jun 1837

Scheme for application of a charity fund left for loans to young freemen of a company and of the interest.

Citations:

[1837] EngR 790, (1837) CP Coop 283, (1837) 47 ER 506

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoAttorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company 18-Nov-1834
A testator gave the residue of his estate to trustees, positively forbidding them to diminish the capital thereof, or that the interest and profit arising be applied to any other use or uses than thereinafter directed ; and he proceeded to direct . .

Cited by:

See AlsoAttorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company Betton’s Charity 14-Feb-1840
Bequest of residue to a company, to apply the interest of a moiety ‘unto the redemption of British slaves in Turkey or Barbary,’ one-fourth to charity schools in London and its suburbs; and in consideration of the care and pains of the company, the . .
See AlsoThe Attorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company 23-Jan-1841
Under a, reference to approve a scheme for the application of charity funds, the Master has no authority to allow, still less to invite, any person to intervene in the inquiry, who is not a party to the cause. If any such person is desirous of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.313907

Attorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company Betton’s Charity: 14 Feb 1840

Bequest of residue to a company, to apply the interest of a moiety ‘unto the redemption of British slaves in Turkey or Barbary,’ one-fourth to charity schools in London and its suburbs; and in consideration of the care and pains of the company, the remaining one-fourth towards necessitated decayed freemen of the company. There were no such British slaves to redeem, and a reference was made to the Master to approve of a scheme for the application of the fund thus unapplied, having regard to all the charitable bequests in the will. Held, that the application of the fund to the education of the British emancipated apprenticed negroes was iiot a cy-pres application ; secondly, that the gift to the freemen of the company was a charitable bequest ; and, thirdly, there being no direct objects to which the income could be applied, regard being had to the bequest touching British captives, that the application of the fund to the second and third purposes was as near as could be to the intention of the testator, having regard to all the charitable bequests in the will.
Lord Langdale MR said that: ‘ He did not recognise the relator as distinct from the Attorney-General. That the suit was the suit of the Attorney-General, though at the relation of another person upon whom he relied and who was answerable for costs; and that he could only recognise the counsel for the relator as the counsel for the Attorney-General, and could hear them only by his permission ; that the suit was so entirely under the control of the Attorney-General that he might desire the Court to
‘ dismiss the information, and that if he stated that he did not sanction any proceeding, it would be instantly stopped ‘.

Judges:

Lord Langdale MR

Citations:

[1840] EngR 425, (1840) 2 Beav 313, (1840) 48 ER 1201

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoAttorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company 18-Nov-1834
A testator gave the residue of his estate to trustees, positively forbidding them to diminish the capital thereof, or that the interest and profit arising be applied to any other use or uses than thereinafter directed ; and he proceeded to direct . .
See AlsoAttorney-General v Ironmongers’ Company 3-Jun-1837
Scheme for application of a charity fund left for loans to young freemen of a company and of the interest. . .

Cited by:

See AlsoThe Attorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company 23-Jan-1841
Under a, reference to approve a scheme for the application of charity funds, the Master has no authority to allow, still less to invite, any person to intervene in the inquiry, who is not a party to the cause. If any such person is desirous of . .
CitedGouriet v Union of Post Office Workers HL 26-Jul-1977
The claimant sought an injunction to prevent the respondent Trades Union calling on its members to boycott mail to South Africa. The respondents challenged the ability of the court to make such an order.
Held: The wide wording of the statute . .
CitedGouriet v Union of Post Office Workers HL 26-Jul-1977
The claimant sought an injunction to prevent the respondent Trades Union calling on its members to boycott mail to South Africa. The respondents challenged the ability of the court to make such an order.
Held: The wide wording of the statute . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Constitutional

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.309851

The Attorney-General v The Ironmongers’ Company: 26 Jan 1847

A charity scheme was directed. The relator, without the sanction of the Master, advertised and incurred expense in obtaining information. The Court refused to allow the ordinary costs, but, on the ground of its having proved useful to the charity, allowed the money out of pocket bona fide expended.

Citations:

[1847] EngR 161 (B), (1847) 10 Beav 194

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Charity

Updated: 02 May 2022; Ref: scu.300777

Commissioner of Valuation for Northern Ireland v Lurgan Borough Council: CANI 1968

The respondent local authority owned an indoor swimming pool. It claimed exemption from rates under section 2 of the 1854 Act saying that it was used exclusively for the purposes of a recreational charity under the Act of 1958.
Held: (By a majority) The ground of exemption was established. Lord MacDermott said: ‘Here, I think, there can be no doubt that in the construction, equipment and running of this hereditament the Council has provided facilities for recreation. The big question is – have these facilities been provided ‘in the interests of social welfare’? ‘Social welfare’ is a somewhat vague and uncertain expression. Taken by itself I still incline to the view I expressed in National Deposit Friendly Society Trustees v. Skegness Urban District Council, that it signifies something more than ‘social well-being’. In the present context, however, I do not think it necessary to speculate as to the precise distinction to be drawn between these two expressions as subsection (2) of section 1, though not exactly a definition, provides in effect, in my opinion, the essential elements which must be present if a state of social well-being is to amount to ‘social welfare’ as that expression is used in the section. These elements are to be drawn from paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (2). By (a) the facilities must be provided with the object of improving the conditions of life for the persons for whom the facilities are primarily intended. To my mind the provision of the hereditament satisfies that requirement. The primary object, even if confined to the phraseology of the preamble to the Act of 1846, was clearly to improve the conditions of life of the inhabitants of the Borough of Lurgan and if, as I have held, this was done in a manner which enured for the benefit of the public at large, paragraph (a) would still be complied with. It is clear from the terms of the case stated that the hereditament was not only provided to improve the conditions of life for those for whom it was primarily intended, but that in fact it has done so. The full use which has been made of the hereditament since its inauguration is, I think, cogent evidence that it has filled a need in the life of the community and has added to the enjoyment of its members.
The second requirement to be satisfied is one or other of the subparagraphs of paragraph (b). Of these alternatives I am of opinion that subparagraph (i) does not apply so as to support the Council’s case. There is nothing in the case stated that I can see which shows that those benefited have need of the facilities provided by reason of any of the specific factors mentioned, ie. youth, age, infirmity or disablement, poverty or social and economic circumstances. But subparagraph (ii), on the views I have already expressed, is applicable for the facilities of the hereditament are available to the public at large.’

Judges:

Lord MacDermott LCJ

Citations:

[1968] NI 104

Statutes:

Valuation (Ireland) Amendment Act 1854 82

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Cited by:

CitedGuild v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 6-May-1992
The will left land for a sports centre to a local authority which no longer existed. If the gift was charitable, the gift would be applied cy pres, but if not it would fail and pass to the family and be subect to Inheritance Tax.
Held: A gift . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Charity

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.273194

Verge v Somerville: PC 1924

On an appeal from New South Wales, The Board considered the validity of a gift ‘to the trustees’ of the Repatriation Fund or other similar fund for the benefit of New South Wales returned soldiers’.
Held: Trusts for education and religion do not require any qualification of poverty to be introduced to give them validity and generally poverty is not a necessary qualification in trusts beneficial to the community. However, Lord Wrenbury said: ‘To ascertain whether a gift constitutes a valid charitable trust so as to escape being void on the ground of perpetuity, a first enquiry must be whether it is public-whether it is for the benefit of the community or of an appreciably important class of the community. The inhabitants of a parish or town, or any particular class of such inhabitants, may, for instance, be the objects of such a gift, but private individuals, or a fluctuating body of private individuals, cannot.’

Judges:

Lord Wrenbury

Citations:

[1924] AC 496

Jurisdiction:

Australia

Cited by:

CitedBaddeley (Trustees of the Newtown Trust) v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 17-Feb-1955
Land had been conveyed to trustees for the moral, social and physical well-being of a community. The court considered whether the trust was charitable in nature, where it was said that it confined the benefits to a class of people who do not . .
CitedIn Re Strakosch 1949
The court may construe a gift as impliedly limited to charitable purposes. Lord Greene MR said: ‘In Williams’ Trustees v Inland Revenue Commissioners the House of Lords has laid down very clearly that in order to come within Lord Macnaghten’s fourth . .
CitedRe Resch’s Will Trusts; Vera Caroline Le Crasv Perpetual Trustee Company Limited PC 19-Oct-1967
(New South Wales) The testator left a series of testamentary provisions including gifts which worked cumulatively. Lord Wilberforce discussed the breadth of evidence admissible in the probate court: ‘The principles which ought to be applied on such . .
CitedOppenheim v Tobacco Securities Trust Co Ltd HL 13-Dec-1950
Trustees were directed to apply certain income in providing for ‘the education of children of employees or former employees’ of a British limited company or any of its subsidiary or allied companies. The number of eligible employees was over . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Commonwealth

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.264008

Meisels v Lichtman and Another: QBD 9 Apr 2008

The court considered gifts to charity: ‘Where there is a dispute it seems to me that it is the intentions of the donor nor that will be crucial, rather than the more familiar exercise of ascertaining the intentions of both parties in construing the agreement’.

Judges:

Blake J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 661 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedDewar v Dewar ChD 1975
The court was asked whether a payment of pounds 500 by their mother to one of two brothers who were the litigants was to be treated as a gift or as a loan. The evidence showed that the mother always intended it to be a gift, that the son wanted to . .

Cited by:

CitedScott v Bridge and Others ChD 25-Nov-2020
Claim to recover money and property said to have been transferred by the claimant to the defendants or one or more of them. The money concerned came from a bank account belonging to the claimant. The property concerned consisted of two . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Charity

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.266532

In re Gray: 1925

Gifts made exclusively for the purpose of promoting the efficiency of the armed forces are good charitable gifts.

Citations:

[1925] 1 Ch 362

Cited by:

CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Glasgow Police Athletic Association HL 9-Mar-1953
The House was asked whether the taxpayer association was established for ‘Charitable purposes only’ so as to benefit from tax exemptions. The association promoted sporting activities among members of the Glasgow police.
Held: Though the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.251601

Attorney General v Webster: 1875

A trust expressed to be for the benefit of a fluctuating body of individuals, such as the inhabitants of a locality, can only take effect as a charitable trust, if it has effect at all.

Citations:

(1875) LR 20 Eq 483

Cited by:

CitedGibbs v Harding and others ChD 12-Jan-2007
The testatrix left a will anticipating making another. The court was asked whether a clause leaving her estate to ‘be taken over by the Diocese of Westminster to hold in trust for the Black community of Hackney’ was valid.
Held: The gift was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Trusts

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.247689

Mitford v Reynolds: 1842

A gift was made to the native inhabitans of Dacca. It was challenged as being void.
Held: As to whether a gift was charitable, the same principles apply when a particular class of inhabitants of a locality are the beneficiaries as when the the inhabitants as a whole are beneficiaries.
Lyndhurst LC said: ‘the term ‘the native inhabitants of Dacca’ is used in contradistinction to the European inhabitants or the descendants of European inhabitants.’

Citations:

(1842) 1 Ph 185

Cited by:

CitedGibbs v Harding and others ChD 12-Jan-2007
The testatrix left a will anticipating making another. The court was asked whether a clause leaving her estate to ‘be taken over by the Diocese of Westminster to hold in trust for the Black community of Hackney’ was valid.
Held: The gift was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.247691

In re Lysaght (deceased): 1966

A general charitable purpose (or intention) should be recognised and given effect to, even though some particular directions given by the charity’s founder are (or become) impracticable.

Judges:

Buckley J

Citations:

[1966] Ch 191

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedFraser and Another v Canterbury Diocesan Board of Finance and others HL 27-Oct-2005
Land had been acquired by a deed under the 1841 Act, but had in 1995 ceased to be used as a school ‘for the education of children and adults of the labouring manufacturing and other poorer classes . . And for no other purpose ‘. Under the Act, the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Trusts, Charity

Updated: 30 April 2022; Ref: scu.231639

Royal College of Surgeons of England v National Provincial Bank Ltd: HL 1952

The College was established to promote and encourage the study and practice of the art and science of surgery. The professional protection of members of the College (not a charitable purpose) was held to be ‘an incidental though an important and perhaps necessary consequence of the work of the College in carrying out its main object’.
Held: Some charitable trusts are inevitably likely to benefit some individuals, but they do not thereby lose that charitable status. If the main purpose of the body of persons is charitable and the only elements in its constitution and operations which are non-charitable are merely incidental to that main purpose, that body of persons is a charity notwithstanding the presence of those elements.

Citations:

[1952] AC 631

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedSir Graham Stanley Latimer and others – Trustees for the Crown Forestry Rental Trust v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue PC 25-Feb-2004
PC (New Zealand) The Crown created a charitable trust for certain Maori people. Upon exhaustion of the purpose, the fund was to revert to the Crown. The trustees appealed a finding of liability to income tax.
CitedInland Revenue Commissioners v Glasgow Police Athletic Association HL 9-Mar-1953
The House was asked whether the taxpayer association was established for ‘Charitable purposes only’ so as to benefit from tax exemptions. The association promoted sporting activities among members of the Glasgow police.
Held: Though the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.194632

Milner v Staffordshire Congregational Union (Inc): ChD 1956

The plaintiff had contracted to buy land from a charity. The consent of the Charity Commissioners had not been obtained, but the contract was not conditional on such consent. When the charity trustess realised that consent was required they told the plaintiff that the contract was conditional on such consent and applied for consent. Before that consent was received, the plaintiff purported to rescind the contract, and sue for the return of his deposit.
Held: Dankwerts J said: ‘I have to decide what that Act means when it says: ‘make a sale’. It does not say ‘make a conveyance’ or ‘complete a sale’ or anything of that sort; it simply says ‘make any sale’, and I think for the purposes of the section, though I am bound to say that the matter is not free from doubt, that a sale is made when a contract is entered into by the owners of the property in question for the sale of the property to some purchaser. It is therefore a breach of the terms of the section if a body of charitable trustees enters into a contract to sell the trust property without the authority of the Charity Commissioners. I would observe that there is some support for this view to be found in the documents in the present *59 case. In the alleged contract the phrase is: ‘The property is sold subject to any reservations’, and so on, and in the solicitors’ letter of 24 September 1954, the expression is: ‘The sale of this property must be subject to the consent of the Charity Commissioners.’ It is perhaps then not unreasonable to think that the word ‘sale’ in the section must be used in a similar manner. I am not saying, of course, that a conveyance in pursuance of the purported contract would be any more lawful than the original contract; but it seems to me that the word ‘sale’ must include the making of a contract of sale at least as well as a conveyance on sale.’ The contract was unlawful; the plaintiff was not bound by it; and he was entitled to repayment. The court considered that the expression ‘make any sale’ in section 29 of the 1855 Act, included a contract for sale.

Judges:

Dankwerts J

Citations:

[1956] Ch 275, [1956] 2 WLR 556, [1956] 1 All ER 494

Statutes:

Charitable Trusts Amendment Act 1855 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBayoumi v Women’s Total Abstinence Union Ltd and Another ChD 21-Jan-2003
The claimant sought specific performance of a contract to purchase land from the defendant charity. The defendant had not complied with its obligations under the Act. The cliamant sought to say at the transaction came within s36(3) (that it was . .
DisapprovedBayoumi v Women’s Total Abstinence Union Ltd and Another CA 5-Nov-2003
A charity entered into a contract for the sale of land. It failed to comply with the requirements under the Act. The purchaser assigned the benefit of the contract, to the claimant who sought to enforce the contract.
Held: The section only . .
CitedHaslemere Estates Ltd v Baker 1982
A contract for the sale of land by a charity was expressed to be subject to and conditional upon the grant of a consent before 31 March 1982 and if consent was not granted before that date then the contract was to be ‘null and void and of no further . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Charity

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187942

Re Camden’s Charity: 1881

Citations:

[1881] 28 ChD 310

Cited by:

CitedRe Lepton’s Charity 1972
. .
CitedVarsani and others v Jesani, Patel and Her Majesty’s Attorney-General CA 3-Apr-1998
A Hindu religious sect, constituted as a charity, had split into two factions.
Held: The court had jurisdiction to order that the assets of the sect should be divided under the powers in the Act, and held upon separate trusts for the two . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187519

Attorney-General v Poole: 1938

Open space land had been conveyed to Poole Corporation ‘in fee simple to the intent that the same may for ever hereafter be preserved and used as an open space or as a pleasure or recreation ground for the public use.’
Held: There was no express reference in the Conveyance to the 1906 Act but the Court of Appeal thought it applied in any event.

Citations:

[1938] 1 Ch 23

Statutes:

Open Spaces Act 1906

Cited by:

AppliedLiverpool City Council v Attorney General 15-May-1992
Land had been given to the local authority ‘for use as a recreation ground and for no other purpose’ The Attorney-General sought to oblige the authority to maintain it as such.
Held: The form of gift was not charitable, and no obligation to . .
CitedRegina v City of Sunderland ex parte Beresford HL 13-Nov-2003
Land had been used as a park for many years. The council land owner refused to register it as a common, saying that by maintaining the park it had indicated that the use was by consent and licence, and that prescription did not apply.
Held: . .
CitedRegina v Stock CACD 8-Aug-2008
The defendant sought to appeal his conviction in 1970 for robbery. He had refused to attend an identity parade but was then confronted with the main witness. Witnesses had also been shown photographs from which they were said to have selected the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Local Government, Land

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.187390

Liverpool City Council v Attorney General: 15 May 1992

Land had been given to the local authority ‘for use as a recreation ground and for no other purpose’ The Attorney-General sought to oblige the authority to maintain it as such.
Held: The form of gift was not charitable, and no obligation to maintain it was created. Even if the authority had allowed creation of a charitable trust, only the original donor could enforce that trust, and not the Attorney-General.

Citations:

Unreported, 15 May 1992, Times 01-May-1992

Citing:

AppliedAttorney-General v Poole 1938
Open space land had been conveyed to Poole Corporation ‘in fee simple to the intent that the same may for ever hereafter be preserved and used as an open space or as a pleasure or recreation ground for the public use.’
Held: There was no . .

Cited by:

CitedBath and North East Somerset Council v HM Attorney General, The Treasury Solicitor (Bona Vacantia) ChD 31-Jul-2002
Land was conveyed to the Council’s predecessor on condition that it be left available for use for sports and similar recreations, and left as an open space. It was now sought to develop the land as a home for a football club. The Council sought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Land

Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.183317

In re Scarisbrick’s Will Trusts, Cockshott v Public Trustee: CA 1951

Possible Charity for poor persons within an area

The court was asked whether a trusts for poor persons within a restricted category, the testator’s descendants, not meeting the usual requirement that the benefits be available to a wider section of the community, may be held charitable.
Held: Such a trust could be charitable.
The dividing line between a charitable trust and a private trust ‘depended on whether as a matter of construction the gift was for the relief of poverty amongst a particular description of poor people [charitable] or was merely a gift to particular poor persons, the relief of poverty among them being the motive of the gift [private]’ The fact that the gift took the form of a perpetual trust would no doubt indicate that the intention of the donor could not have been to confer private benefits on particular people whose possible necessities he had in mind ; but the fact that the capital of the gift was to be distributed at once did not necessarily show that the gift was a private trust.
Jenkins LJ set out five general propositions upon whether a trust for the relief of poverty was charitable, saying: (i) It is a general rule that a trust or gift in order to be charitable in the legal sense must be for the benefit of the public or some section of the public; . . (ii) An aggregate of individuals ascertained by reference to some personal tie (e.g. of blood or contract) such as the relations of a particular individual, the members of a particular family, the employees of a particular firm, the members of a particular association, does not amount to the public or a section thereof for the purposes of the general rule; . . (in) It follows that according to the general rule above stated a trust or gift under which the beneficiaries or potential beneficiaries are confined (that is an important word) to some aggregate of individuals ascertained as above is not legally charitable even though its purposes are such that it would have been legally charitable if the range of potential beneficiaries had extended to the public at large or a section thereof (e.g. an educational trust confined as in Re Compton to the lawful descendants of three named persons, or, as in Oppenhein v. Tobacco Securities Trust Co., Ltd. to the children of employees of former employees of a particular company); . . (iv) There is, however, an exception to the general rule in that trusts or gifts for the relief of poverty have been held to be charitable even though they are limited in their application to some aggregate of individuals ascertained as above, and are, therefore, not trusts or gifts for the benefit of the public or a section thereof. This exception operates whether the personal tie is one of blood (as in the numerous so-called ‘poor relations’ cases, to some of which I will presently refer) or of contract . .’

Judges:

Jenkins LJ

Citations:

[1951] 1 All ER 822, [1951] Ch 622

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromScarisbrick’s Will Trusts, In re ChD 1950
The court considered whether a trust was charitable.
Held: The distinction lay in whether the gift took the form of a trust under which capital was retained and the income only applied for the benefit of the objects, in which case the gift was . .

Cited by:

ApprovedDingle v Turner and Others HL 16-Feb-1972
Gift to Specified person not Charitable
The testator left part of his property on charitable trusts for the relief of the poverty of ‘the poor employees’ of a company. The appellant argued that it was not a charitable gift, and that the gift failed.
Held: The purpose will not be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Charity

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.181257

Monds v Stackhouse: 1948

(High Court of Australia) A gift of money was made to the Corporation of a city to provide the nucleus of a fund to provide ‘a suitable hall or theatre for the holding of concerts to provide music for the citizens of the City and for the production of drama entertainments and the holding of meetings of a cultural or educational value’.
Held: The gift was charitable. A gift to a municipal corporation for enabling it to discharge one of its functions was charitable as bringing about a reduction of the burden of rates and taxes on the community. If the trusts created would otherwise be valid charitable trusts, their validity is not to be impugned by a provision which permits these trust to be implemented, in part, by being placed at the disposition of private individuals.

Judges:

Latham LJ, Dixon and McTiernan JJ

Citations:

(1948) 77 CLR 232

Cited by:

CitedBath and North East Somerset Council v HM Attorney General, The Treasury Solicitor (Bona Vacantia) ChD 31-Jul-2002
Land was conveyed to the Council’s predecessor on condition that it be left available for use for sports and similar recreations, and left as an open space. It was now sought to develop the land as a home for a football club. The Council sought . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Commonwealth

Updated: 28 April 2022; Ref: scu.180935

Murdoch’s Trustees v Weir and Others: HL 6 Feb 1908

A testator directed that the residue of his estate should be employed in the relief of persons who, with other qualifications, had ‘shown practical sympathy in the pursuits of science.’
Per Lord Chancellor-‘All that can be required is that the description of the classes to be benefited shall be sufficiently certain to enable men of common sense to carry out the expressed wishes of the testator. . . Persons who have shown practical sympathy in an object obviously are persons who have given time or money, or made some sort of sacrifice to further it. I am satisfied the trustees, or failing them the Court, would find no difficulty in giving effect to the bequest.’

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lord Macnaghten, Lord Robertson, and Lord Atkinson

Citations:

[1908] UKHL 335, 45 SLR 335

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Wills and Probate, Charity

Updated: 26 April 2022; Ref: scu.621496

Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners: HL 1956

The company was a foreign corporation constituted according to the laws of the state of New York for objects which were exclusively charitable according to the law of the United Kingdom.
Held: The term ‘charity’ does not include an institution established under the laws of another legal system.
Lord Morton said: ‘It is at once apparent that the phrase in section 37(1)(b) ‘any body of persons or trust established for charitable purposes only’ is not expressly limited to bodies of persons or trusts established in the United Kingdom, but the Court of Appeal held that it should be construed as being so limited. This conclusion was based entirely upon a consideration of the true construction of the Act of 1918 . . I agree with the conclusion reached by the Court of Appeal, and as no question of principle arises in this case, and my reasons are in substance the same as those appearing in the judgments of that court, I shall not detain your Lordships by setting them out in my own words.’
Lord Norman said: ‘it is clearly the English system that he has in mind, [referring to the judgment of Lord Evershed] for it goes without saying that the Attorney-General has no right to invoke the powers of the courts beyond the boundary of England.’
The phrase ‘trust established for charitable purposes only’, in section 37 of the Income Tax Act 1918, must be interpreted as being implicitly limited to trusts which were governed by the law of some part of the United Kingdom and were subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of the United Kingdom.

Judges:

Lord Morton of Henryton, Lord Normand

Citations:

[1956] AC 39, [1955] 3 All ER 97, 36 TC 126, [1955] UKHL TC – 36 – 126

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromCamille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1954
The Court considered whether it had jurisdiction to make an order with respect to a company registered in New York for objects which were charitable according to the laws of England.
Held: The Revenue’s appeal against a finding that the . .

Cited by:

CitedGaudiya Mission and others v Brahmachary CA 30-Jul-1997
The High Court had found the plaintiff to be a charity, and ordered the Attorney-General to be joined in. The A-G appealed that order saying that the plaintiff was not a charity within the 1993 Act. The charity sought to spread the Vaishnava . .
CitedRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs ChD 18-Sep-2014
Executors appealed against rejection of their claim that a gift in the will qualified for relief against Inheritance Tax as being a charitable gift. The Trusts concerned assets in Jersey.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘The expression ‘held on trust . .
CitedRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 16-Sep-2016
Executors appealed against a decision that a residual gift in a will was not charitable and that it was therefore subject to Inheritance Tax arguing that the section if construed in this way was an unlawful restriction on the free movement of . .
CitedRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 16-Oct-2019
A Jersey Charity created under a will of a Jersey resident was transfer to the UK, and reregistered with the UK Charity Commission. The Revenue sought to apply Inheritance Tax.
Held: Jersey was to be considered a third country for the purpose . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 21 April 2022; Ref: scu.200676

Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs: SC 16 Oct 2019

A Jersey Charity created under a will of a Jersey resident was transfer to the UK, and reregistered with the UK Charity Commission. The Revenue sought to apply Inheritance Tax.
Held: Jersey was to be considered a third country for the purpose of a transfer of capital from the United Kingdom. The restriction of relief from inheritance tax to trusts governed by the law of a part of the United Kingdom is not supportable under EU law. Article 56 applies directly, must have effect in priority to inconsistent national law, whether judicial or legislative in origin.
Held: As the EU rules on free movement of capital do not apply in Jersey, Jersey is to be considered a third country for the purpose of a transfer of capital from the United Kingdom. Capital has moved from a member state where article 56 applies to a territory where it does not and that cannot be considered a purely internal situation. Accordingly, we would decline to make a preliminary reference on this point to the CJEU.
We conclude that article 56 EC applied to Mrs Coulter’s gift of assets in the United Kingdom to trustees in Jersey, that the refusal of relief from inheritance tax on that gift under section 23 of the Inheritance Tax Act was in breach of article 56, and that the appeal should therefore be allowed.

Judges:

Lady Hale (President), Lord Reed (Deputy President), Lord Carnwath, Lord Hodge, Lord Lloyd-Jones

Citations:

[2019] UKSC 43, [2019] STI 1722, [2019] WLR(D) 588, [2019] PTSR 1924, [2019] 3 WLR 757, [2019] STC 2182, UKSC 2017/0190

Links:

Bailii, Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Summary Video, SC 2019 Apr 02 am Video, SC 2019 Apr pm Video, SC 2019 Apr 03 am Video, SC 2019 Apr 03 pm Video

Statutes:

Inheritance Tax Act 1984 23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedJersey Produce Marketing Organisation (New Accessions) ECJ 8-Nov-2005
Europa Legislation on the export of potatoes from Jersey to the United Kingdom – 1972 Act of Accession – Protocol No 3 on the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man – Regulation No 706/73 – Articles 23 EC, 25 EC and . .
At ChDRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs ChD 18-Sep-2014
Executors appealed against rejection of their claim that a gift in the will qualified for relief against Inheritance Tax as being a charitable gift. The Trusts concerned assets in Jersey.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘The expression ‘held on trust . .
At CA (2)Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 17-Oct-2017
Inheritance tax, gifts to charities and freedom of capital . .
At CA (1)Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 16-Sep-2016
Executors appealed against a decision that a residual gift in a will was not charitable and that it was therefore subject to Inheritance Tax arguing that the section if construed in this way was an unlawful restriction on the free movement of . .
CitedRoque v The Lieutenant Governor of Jersey ECJ 16-Jul-1998
(Judgment) Free movement of persons – Act of Accession 1972 – Protocol No 3 concerning the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man – Jersey
Article 4 of Protocol 3 to the Act of Accession did not prohibit a difference of treatment resulting from . .
CitedBarclay and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice and Others SC 22-Oct-2014
Constitutional Status of Chanel Islands considered
The Court was asked as to the role, if any, of the courts of England and Wales (including the Supreme Court) in the legislative process of one of the Channel Islands. It raised fundamental questions about the constitutional relationship between the . .
Citedvan der Kooy v Staatssecretaris van Financien ECJ 28-Jan-1999
Judgment – Part Four of the EC Treaty -? Article 227 of the EC Treaty ? Article 7(1)(a) of Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC ? Goods in free circulation in overseas countries and territories
Under the special arrangements applicable to the OCTs, . .
DeterminativePrunus (Free Movement Of Capital) ECJ 5-May-2011
Direct taxation – Free movement of capital – Article 64 TFEU – Legal persons established in a non-Member State – Ownership of immovable property located in a Member State – Tax on the market value of that property – Refusal of exemption – Assessment . .
CitedCommission v United Kingdom ECJ 23-Sep-2003
(Judgment) Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations – Failure to implement, in respect of Gibraltar, Directives 67/548/EEC and 87/18/EEC (concerning dangerous chemical substances); 93/12/EEC (concerning liquid fuels); 79/113/EEC, . .
CitedDepartment of Health and Social Security v Barr and Montrose Holdings (Judgment) ECJ 3-Jul-1991
Europa It follows from Article 1(3) of the Treaty of Accession 1972 in conjunction with Article 158 of the Act of Accession that the jurisdiction in preliminary ruling proceedings conferred on the Court by . .
CitedX BV v Staatssecretaris van Financien ECJ 5-Jun-2014
(Judgment) Free movement of capital – Restrictions – Payment of dividends from a Member State to an overseas territory of the same State – Scope of European Union law – Special European Union-OCTs arrangements . .
CitedThe Gibraltar Betting and Gaming Association v Revenue and Customs Commissioners and another (Government of Gibraltar intervening) ECJ 13-Jun-2017
ECJ Status of Gibraltar – Freedom To Provide Services – Purely Internal Situation – Inadmissibility : Judgment . .
CitedCommission v United Kingdom ECJ 21-Jul-2005
Europa Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations – Directive 77/799/EEC – Mutual assistance by the competent authorities – Fields of VAT and excise duties – Partial transposition- Territory of Gibraltar. . .
CitedSpain v United Kingdom ECJ 12-Sep-2006
ECJ Law Governing – The Institutions – European Parliament – Elections – Right to vote – Commonwealth citizens residing in Gibraltar and not having citizenship of the Union. . .
CitedCamille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1956
The company was a foreign corporation constituted according to the laws of the state of New York for objects which were exclusively charitable according to the law of the United Kingdom.
Held: The term ‘charity’ does not include an institution . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Inheritance Tax, Charity, European, Constitutional

Updated: 21 April 2022; Ref: scu.642829

Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs: ChD 18 Sep 2014

Executors appealed against rejection of their claim that a gift in the will qualified for relief against Inheritance Tax as being a charitable gift. The Trusts concerned assets in Jersey.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘The expression ‘held on trust for charitable purposes’ in section 23(6) requires not only that the charitable purposes be UK law charitable purposes but that the relevant trust be subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom courts as well.’
The reasoning of the Court of Appeal in Dreyfus applies to the wording of section 23 of the IHTA. The Coulter Trust did not qualify for exemption under either limb of subsection (6) because it was not governed by United Kingdom law but by Jersey law: ‘The Appellants have not put forward any good reason why Parliament should have intended that the second limb of section 23 should be so much broader than the first, encompassing trusts governed by foreign law but limited to charitable bodies established under UK law. Another important plank in the reasoning of the Court in Dreyfus was that the distinction drawn between the first limb of section 37 (namely income of any body of persons or trust established for charitable purposes) and the second limb of section 37 (namely income which according to the rule established by deed of trust or will are applicable to charitable purposes only) was intended only to distinguish between income held by bodies which are exclusively charitable on the one hand and bodies which are not exclusively charitable but which hold the relevant income for exclusively charitable purposes on the other. It was not intended to be a difference beyond that, allowing a much wider geographic range of bodies to fall within the second limb than could fall within the first. ‘

Judges:

Rose DBE J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 3010 (Ch), [2014] BTC 42, [2014] WLR(D) 449, [2014] STI 2931, [2015] STC 451, [2015] PTSR 60, [2014] WTLR 1717

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Inheritance Tax Act 1984 23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedCamille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1954
The Court considered whether it had jurisdiction to make an order with respect to a company registered in New York for objects which were charitable according to the laws of England.
Held: The Revenue’s appeal against a finding that the . .
CitedCamille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1956
The company was a foreign corporation constituted according to the laws of the state of New York for objects which were exclusively charitable according to the law of the United Kingdom.
Held: The term ‘charity’ does not include an institution . .
CitedHM Inspector of Taxes v Dextra Accessories Ltd HL 7-Jul-2005
The taxpayer companies had paid funds into a trust for employees. They sought to set off the payments against their liability to corporation tax. The revenue argued that they were deductible only in the year in which they were paid to the employees. . .

Cited by:

At ChDRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 16-Sep-2016
Executors appealed against a decision that a residual gift in a will was not charitable and that it was therefore subject to Inheritance Tax arguing that the section if construed in this way was an unlawful restriction on the free movement of . .
At ChDRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 16-Oct-2019
A Jersey Charity created under a will of a Jersey resident was transfer to the UK, and reregistered with the UK Charity Commission. The Revenue sought to apply Inheritance Tax.
Held: Jersey was to be considered a third country for the purpose . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Inheritance Tax, Charity

Updated: 19 April 2022; Ref: scu.536733

Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs: CA 16 Sep 2016

Executors appealed against a decision that a residual gift in a will was not charitable and that it was therefore subject to Inheritance Tax arguing that the section if construed in this way was an unlawful restriction on the free movement of capital. The revenue contended that the gift by a Jersey resident was to a Jersey Trust which was not solely charitable not being subject only to UK law.
Held: The authority as to the charity point was unassailable and the trustees’ appeal on that point failed. However, the court could not reconcile the question as to freedom of movement under European law, and it asked the parties to consider a question for referral to the European Court of Justice.

Judges:

Moore-Bick VP CA, Tomlinson, Kitchin LJJ

Citations:

[2016] EWCA Civ 938, [2016] WLR(D) 496, [2016] STC 2218, [2016] BTC 38, [2016] STI 2653

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Inheritance Tax Act 1984 23, TFEU 63, Income Tax Act 2007 989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At ChDRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs ChD 18-Sep-2014
Executors appealed against rejection of their claim that a gift in the will qualified for relief against Inheritance Tax as being a charitable gift. The Trusts concerned assets in Jersey.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘The expression ‘held on trust . .
CitedCamille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1954
The Court considered whether it had jurisdiction to make an order with respect to a company registered in New York for objects which were charitable according to the laws of England.
Held: The Revenue’s appeal against a finding that the . .
CitedCamille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1956
The company was a foreign corporation constituted according to the laws of the state of New York for objects which were exclusively charitable according to the law of the United Kingdom.
Held: The term ‘charity’ does not include an institution . .
CitedBarras v Aberdeen Steam Trawling and Fishing Co HL 17-Mar-1933
The court looked at the inference that a statute’s draughtsman could be assumed when using a phrase to rely on a known interpretation of that phrase.
Viscount Buckmaster said: ‘It has long been a well established principle to be applied in the . .
CitedRoque v The Lieutenant Governor of Jersey ECJ 16-Jul-1998
(Judgment) Free movement of persons – Act of Accession 1972 – Protocol No 3 concerning the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man – Jersey . .
CitedHM Inspector of Taxes v Dextra Accessories Ltd HL 7-Jul-2005
The taxpayer companies had paid funds into a trust for employees. They sought to set off the payments against their liability to corporation tax. The revenue argued that they were deductible only in the year in which they were paid to the employees. . .

Cited by:

See AlsoRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 17-Oct-2017
Inheritance tax, gifts to charities and freedom of capital . .
At CA (1)Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 16-Oct-2019
A Jersey Charity created under a will of a Jersey resident was transfer to the UK, and reregistered with the UK Charity Commission. The Revenue sought to apply Inheritance Tax.
Held: Jersey was to be considered a third country for the purpose . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Inheritance Tax, Charity, European

Updated: 19 April 2022; Ref: scu.569895

Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs: CA 17 Oct 2017

Inheritance tax, gifts to charities and freedom of capital

Judges:

Arden LJ, Briggs of Westbourne L, Green J

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1584, [2017] WLR(D) 672, [2018] PTSR 1063, [2017] WTLR 1119, [2018] 1 WLR 3013, [2017] BTC 28, [2018] STC 910

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Inheritance Tax Act 1984 23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See AlsoRoutier and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 16-Sep-2016
Executors appealed against a decision that a residual gift in a will was not charitable and that it was therefore subject to Inheritance Tax arguing that the section if construed in this way was an unlawful restriction on the free movement of . .

Cited by:

At CA (2)Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs SC 16-Oct-2019
A Jersey Charity created under a will of a Jersey resident was transfer to the UK, and reregistered with the UK Charity Commission. The Revenue sought to apply Inheritance Tax.
Held: Jersey was to be considered a third country for the purpose . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Inheritance Tax, Charity

Updated: 19 April 2022; Ref: scu.597391

Revenue and Customs v University of Cambridge: CA 27 Mar 2018

The court decided to make a reference to the CJEU because it concluded that the correct approach to be taken to the issue of attribution was not acte clair.

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 568, [2018] BVC 16, [2018] STC 848, [2018] STI 977

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Reference fromThe Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of The University of Cambridge ECJ 3-Jul-2019
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Value added tax (VAT) – Deduction of input tax – Management costs of an endowment fund that makes investments with the aim of financing the whole of the taxable person’s output transactions – Overheads . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v Frank A Smart and Son Ltd SC 29-Jul-2019
The question was whether a taxpayer can deduct as input tax the VAT which it has incurred in purchasing entitlements to an EU farm subsidy, the Single Farm Payment. The taxpayer had used those entitlements to annual subsidies over several years and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Charity, European

Updated: 18 April 2022; Ref: scu.608356

The Attorney-General v Dulwich College: 29 Jul 1841

By letters patent, E. A. was empowered to found a charity, consisting of a master and a specified number of other members, who were thereby created a corporation, with power to take certain lands. E. A. was empowered to make ordinances for the Government thereof, and for the better ordering of the estates, E. A. established the charity, and conveyed the lands to the use of the master and other members, of the numbers specified by the letters patent, and to no other intent and purpose whatsoever. He afterwards made orclinances, whereby, amongst other things, he added to the number of members specified by the letters patent ; and appropriated to them a portion of the revenues of the charity property, Held, that E. A. had not the power of creating additional members, or of declaring any trust of the property in their favour.
An information, alleging an abuse in the internal regulations of a charity dismissed, on the ground that they were the proper subject for the interference of the special visitor.

Citations:

[1841] EngR 957, (1840-1841) 4 Beav 255, (1841) 49 ER 337

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Charity

Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.309135

Sheppard and Another v Inland Revenue Commissioners, Inland Revenue Commissioners v Sheppard: Chd 23 Feb 1993

A Charity Tax avoidance plan was lawful. A company made payments to a charity which then employed them as charity trustees. Since the result was clearly to benefit the charity, and its purposes. The obtaining of a relief from tax, and the making use of an exemption are different for this purpose. The claiming of a tax credit is not a claiming of a relief.

Citations:

Ind Summary 05-Apr-1993, Times 23-Feb-1993, Gazette 07-Apr-1993

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 703 709, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 460(3)

Charity, Corporation Tax

Updated: 10 April 2022; Ref: scu.89221

Peggs and Others v Lamb and Others: ChD 20 Apr 1993

Where beneficiaries had dwindled and income increased, the class of beneficiaries was extended. A gift to a class of people would be construed to be charitable unless there was something in the gift to exclude the presumption. It had been submitted that: ‘the trust was one for the benefit of the community in a particular area without the specification of any particular purpose with the consequence that the permitted purposes are limited to those within the spirit and intendment of the preamble.’ Morritt J held this was not an oxymoron.

Judges:

Morritt J

Citations:

Independent 20-Apr-1993, [1994] Ch 172

Statutes:

Charities Act 1960 13(1)(d)

Cited by:

CitedHitchin Cow Commoners Trust, Re ChD 5-Dec-2001
Land was registered as a common. Rights had been created over the land under the 1882 Act after the Inclosure Acts. Were these rights in the nature of charitable trusts? No use of the land as a cow common had taken place with living memory, and most . .
CitedGibbs v Harding and others ChD 12-Jan-2007
The testatrix left a will anticipating making another. The court was asked whether a clause leaving her estate to ‘be taken over by the Diocese of Westminster to hold in trust for the Black community of Hackney’ was valid.
Held: The gift was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 09 April 2022; Ref: scu.84641

Inland Revenue Commissioners v Oldham Training and Enterprise Council: ChD 11 Oct 1996

The court was asked whether Oldham TEC was established for exclusively charitable purposes. The Commisioners now appealed against a finding that tey were.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The promotion of commerce is not capable of being a charitable object per se. The objects of the company contained two main objects and three subsidiary objects, that the first main object, promoting and providing vocational education and training and re-training, was in itself charitable, and that the first two subsidiary objects were ancillary to the first main object, and did not detract from its charitable nature. The issue arose in relation to the second main object, namely ‘to promote industry, commerce and enterprise of all forms for the benefit of the public in and around Oldham’, read in the light of the third subsidiary object.
Lightman J observed that they show indicia of charity, in that it was an altruistic organisation, prohibiting benefits to its members and being set up to assist others, with emphasis on the overall objective of benefit to the public, or the community, in and around Oldham, and He posed the question as being whether the other object was to be read as subject to an implied limitation ‘so far as charitable’, and sought to answer it only by reference to the terms of the memorandum of association, except as regards evidence of whether an object, identified by the normal processes of construction, is charitable in its nature.
He concluded: ‘Under the unamended objects clause, the second main object, namely promoting trade, commerce and enterprise, and the ancillary object, of providing support services and advice to and for new businesses, on any fair reading must extend to enabling Oldham TEC to promote the interests of individuals engaged in trade, commerce or enterprise and provide benefits and services to them. Paragraph 4.2 of the statement of agreed facts shows that Oldham TEC in the form of the provision of enterprise services does exactly this. Such efforts on the part of Oldham TEC may be intended to make the recipients more profitable and thereby, or otherwise, to improve employment prospects in Oldham. But the existence of these objects, in so far as they confer freedom to provide such private benefits, regardless of the motive or the likely beneficial consequences for employment must disqualify Oldham TEC from having charitable status. The benefits to the community conferred by such activities are too remote.’
Although the object in question stipulated that the promotion of trade, commerce and enterprise was to be for the benefit of the public (or, in the amended version, the community), nevertheless the private benefits which were or could be conferred by the pursuit of this object were not merely incidental or subsidiary to the public benefit, and that for this reason the purpose was not charitable.

Judges:

Lightman J

Citations:

Times 11-Oct-1996, [1996] STC 1218

Statutes:

Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 506(1)

Cited by:

CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
The company had undertaken substantial building works and sought associated tax relief. The court was asked whether, following a change in the company’s memorandum and articles of association, the company, a registered social landlord, remained a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity

Updated: 08 April 2022; Ref: scu.82355