The deed of trust establishing an endowed school provided that the master of the school should he appointed by the vicars of three specified parishes, and power was given to the three vicars to remove the master for certain specified causes. The Plaintiff was appointed master of the school in April, 1890, and in December, 1890, two of the vicars served on him a notice of dismissal, signed by themselves, which stated certain reasons for his dismissal. No meeting of the vicars had been summoned to consider the question of the Plaintiff’s dismissal, and he had not had any opportunity of being heard in his defence. There was no evidence that the third
vicar had been consulted. The Plaintiff’ commenced an action against the two vicars who had signed the notice, and moved for an interlocutory injunction to restrain them from removing, or purporting to remove, him from his office until after the holding of a meeting of the vicars, and until he should have had an opportunity of being heard at such a meeting in reply to any changes made against him.
Held: That the Defendants could not remove the Plaintiff without first affording him an opportunity of being heard in his own defence at a properly constituted meeting of the vicars, and that he was entitled to the injunction.
Held: Also, that for the purpose of obtaining this relief it was not necessary, under sect. 17 of the Charitable Trusts Act, 1853, to obtain the consent of the Charity Commissioners to the bringing of the action.
North J
[1891] 2 Ch 84, (1891) 7 TLR 358, [1891] UKLawRpCh 40
Commonlii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Capel v Child 1832
A bishop issued a requisition under statute, requiring the Vicar of W to nominate a Curate with a stipend, on the ground that it appeared to the bishop, of his own knowledge, that the ecclesiastical duties of the vicarage and parish church of W were . .
Cited by:
Cited – Ridge v Baldwin (No 1) HL 14-Mar-1963
No Condemnation Without Opportunity For Defence
Ridge, a Chief Constable, had been wrongfully dismissed because he was not given the opportunity of presenting his defence. He had been acquitted of the charges brought against him, but the judge at trial had made adverse comments about his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 October 2021; Ref: scu.653093