In 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 settled, and the practice in such a case is to hand over the fund to the trustee to be applied according to the trusts of the will without directing a scheme.’ Maugham J had formed the view that it would be possible for the trustees to carry out the objects of the trust without the necessity for a scheme to be formulated or approved by the court . . There was evidence before him that, through its counsel, the German Government had informed the court that there would be no objection… to a statement being made on behalf of the German Government that the fund would be applied according to the wishes of the testator.
However, the Court has the jurisdiction to provide the detailed machinery for the administration of the donor’s charitable objects by means of an administrative scheme.
Maugham J
[1931] 2 Ch 122
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.
Updated: 24 August 2021; Ref: scu.200672