Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  















Charity - From: 1960 To: 1969

This page lists 10 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019.


 
 In re Wykes, deceased; Riddington v Spencer; 1961 - [1961] Ch 229; [1961] 1 All ER 471

 
 Neville Estates Ltd v Madden; ChD 1962 - [1962] Ch 832

 
 Glasgow Corporation v Johnstone and Others (orse Johnstons); HL 1965 - [1965] 2 WLR 657; [1965] AC 609
 
Re Clore's Settlement Trusts [1966] 1 WLR 955; [1966] 2 All ER 272
1966
ChD
Pennycuick J
Trusts, Charity
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."
1 Citers


 
In re Lysaght (deceased) [1966] Ch 191
1966

Buckley J
Trusts, Charity
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.
1 Citers



 
 Satterthwaite, Re; CA 26-Jan-1966 - [1966] EWCA Civ 3; [1966] 1 WLR 277; [1966] 1 All ER 919
 
Inland Revenue Commissioners v Educational Grants Association [1967] Ch 993
1967


Charity
The court considered the charitable status of the Metal Box company scholarships.

 
Scottish Burial Reform and Cremation Society v Glasgow Corporation [1967] UKHL 3; [1968] AC 138; [1967] 3 All ER 215
26 Jul 1967
HL
Lord Reid, Lord Guest, Lord Upjohn, Lord Wilberforce, Lord Pearson
Charity, Rating
The appellants sought partial exemption from rates on its premises. The Corporation challenged their charitable status. The society's object was to encourage and provide facilities for cremation. Held: The object was charitable.
Lord Reid said that it was not now necessary to produce evidence so as to show that the object was for the public benefit, and also that, this being so, the public benefit was not subverted because there was or might also be a profit or benefit to individuals involved in the prosecution of the objects: "But the appellants must also show that the public benefit is of a kind within the spirit and intendment of the Statute of Elizabeth I. The preamble specifies a number of objects which were then recognised as charitable. But in more recent times a wide variety of other objects have come to be recognised as also being charitable. The courts appear to have proceeded first by seeking some analogy between an object mentioned in the preamble and the object with regard to which they had to reach a decision. And then they appear to have gone further and to have been satisfied if they could find an analogy between an object already held to be charitable and the new object claimed to be charitable. And this gradual extension has proceeded so far that there are few modern reported cases where a bequest or donation was made or an institution was being carried on for a clearly specified object which was for the benefit of the public at large and not of individuals, and yet the object was held not to be within the spirit and intendment of the Statute of Elizabeth I. Counsel in the present case were invited to search for any case having even the remotest resemblance to this case in which an object was held to be for the public benefit but yet not to be within that spirit and intendment. But no such case could be found."
Lord Upjohn said: "Upon the first point it must be remembered that Lord Macnaghten's classification was taken from Sir Samuel Romilly's argument in Morice v. Bishop of Durham 162 years ago when the great majority of the inhabitants of the country were living in conditions which to-day would be regarded as of the utmost squalor. The concept of purposes beneficial to the community might then appear to have the qualities of a class and so perhaps, to a lesser extent, in 1891. This so-called fourth class is incapable of further definition and can today hardly be regarded as more than a portmanteau to receive those objects which enlightened opinion would regard as qualifying for consideration under the second heading."
As to the preamble to the 1601 Act: "While it may seem almost incredible to anyone not familiar with this branch of the English law that this should still be taken as the test, it is undoubtedly the accepted test, though only in a very wide and broad sense, well illustrated by the observations of Lord Greene M.R. in In re Strakosch [1949] Ch 529 . ."
He concluded, with some skepticism: "My Lords, I conclude by saying that the authorities show that the "spirit and intendment" of the preamble to the Statute of Elizabeth have been stretched almost to breaking point. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries this was often due to a desire on the part of the courts to save the intentions of the settlor or testator from failure from some technical rule of law. Now that it is used so frequently to avoid the common man's liability to rates or taxes, this generous trend of the law may one day require reconsideration."
Local Government (Financial Provisions etc.) (Scotland) Act 1962 - Mortmain and Charitable Uses Act 1888 13
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Re Resch's Will Trusts; Vera Caroline Le Crasv Perpetual Trustee Company Limited [1967] 3 All ER 915; [1968] 3 WLR 1153; [1969] 1 AC 514; [1967] UKPC 23
19 Oct 1967
PC
Hodson, Guest, Donovan, Wilerforce LL, Sir Alfred North
Charity, Wills and Probate
(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 a question is this, by a court of construction, as compared with those applicable by a court of probate have been clearly stated by Sir John Nicholl. "In the court of probate the whole question is one of intention: the animus testandi and the animus revocandi are completely open to investigation" . . and "in a court of construction, where the factum of the instrument has been previously established in the court of probate, the enquiry is pretty closely restricted to the contents of the instrument itself, in order to ascertain the intentions of the testator": Greenough v Martin (1824) 2 Add 239 at 243".
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Commissioner of Valuation for Northern Ireland v Lurgan Borough Council; CANI 1968 - [1968] NI 104
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.