Harries and Others v Church Commissioners for England and Another: ChD 25 Oct 1991

Trustees Investing using Wider Considerations

The applicant sought a declaration that the Commissioners were obliged to have regard to the object of promoting the Christian faith and not to act in a manner which would be incompatible with that object when managing the assets of which they were trustees. The plaintiffs said that the commissioners, in making investment decisions, attached overriding importance to financial considerations, and that they were only prepared to take non-financial considerations into account to the extent that they did not significantly jeopardise or interfere with accepted investment principles.
Held: The declarations sought were refused. The Church Commissioners were entitled to take ethical considerations into account in forming an investment policy provided there was no risk of detriment to the Trust funds. Ethical investments putting financial return at risk were not open to trustees. Investments should aim for the best return, and be chosen only not to conflict with any express aims of the charity, and should not be used to make moral statements. Trustees must find balance neither bringing their charity into disrepute, nor failing to act with prudence. Such considerations could be allowed provided they did not adversely affect the return.
When property was held by trustees for the purpose of generating money, then prima facie, the purposes of the trust were best served by the trustees seeking to obtain the best return which was consistent with commercial prudence and in most cases, the best interests of the charity required that the trustees’ choice of investments be made solely on the basis of well-established investment criteria. The circumstances in which charity trustees were bound or entitled to make financially disadvantageous investment decisions for ethical considerations were extremely limited and there was no evidence that such circumstances existed in the case before the court. The declaration was refused.
Donald Nicholls VC said: ‘the law is not so cynical as to require trustees to behave in a fashion which would bring them or their charity into disrepute . . on the other hand, trustees must act prudently. They must not use property held by them for investment purposes as a means for making moral statements at the expense of the charity of which they are trustees.’

Sir Donald Nicholls VC
Gazette 11-Nov-1991, [1992] 1 WLR 1241, [1992] 2 All ER 300, [1991] 135 SJLB 180, Times 30-Oct-1991, Independent 29-Oct-1991
England and Wales

Trusts, Equity, Charity

Leading Case

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.81250

Oxfam v Revenue and Customs: ChD 27 Nov 2009

The charity appealed against refusal to allow it to reclaim input VAT. It also sought judicial review of the decision of the Tribunal not to allow it to raise an argument of legitimate expectation. The charity had various subsidiaries conducting commercial activities, which paid VAT in its supplies. The parties disputed how input taxes were attributed between the different activitie, particularly in the context of unrestricted fundraising expenditure.
Held: The Tribunal had had power to listen to the argument on legitimate expectation. In 2000, the revenue had written to the claimant setting out the agreed calculation methods, but the law had altered on the Church of England case. However ‘in a case such as this, involving an assurance given to only one person and where there is no irrationality on the part of the public authority in adopting a different approach, the absence of detrimental reliance on the part of the person to whom the assurance is given is fatal to the argument that to modify the assurance would involve an abuse of power on the part of the public authority which gave the assurance.’

Sales J
[2009] EWHC 3078 (Ch), Times 31-Dec-2009
Bailii
Value Added Tax Act 1994 24(5), Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC 17
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal fromOxfam v Revenue and Customs VDT 30-Jul-2008
VDT VAT – INPUT TAX – Charity applying method apportioning VAT to business purposes – Church of England Children’s Society decision permitted the Appellant to recover part of VAT incurred on unrestricted . .
CitedGus Merchandise Corporation Ltd v Commissioners of Customs and Excise CA 24-Oct-1994
The Commissioners’ general tax management powers include a power to enter into a binding contract with taxpayers as to the method of calculation of Excess VAT paid on sales to agents was not recoverable since there was a binding agreement. . .
CitedRevenue and Customs v The Boots Company Plc ChD 16-Mar-2009
. .
CitedChurch of England Children’s Society v Revenue and Customs ChD 29-Jul-2005
The Society sent out free newsletters to its unpaid fund-raisers and supporters. They sought to deduct input tax charged to them from the supplies associated with the costs.
Held: The Society might be able to deduct such tax as residual input . .
CitedKretztechnik AG v Finanzamt Linz ECJ 26-May-2005
Europa Sixth VAT Directive – Supplies for consideration – Share issue – Admission of a company to a stock exchange – Deductibility of VAT).
Kretztechnik’s objects were the development and sale of . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte MFK Underwriting Agents Ltd CA 1990
Legitimate Expectation once created not withdrawn
The claimant said that a change of practice by the Revenue was contrary to a legitimate expectation.
Held: The Inland Revenue could not withdraw from a representation if it would cause: substantial unfairness to the applicant; if the . .
CitedRegina v North and East Devon Health Authority ex parte Coughlan and Secretary of State for Health Intervenor and Royal College of Nursing Intervenor CA 16-Jul-1999
Consultation to be Early and Real Listening
The claimant was severely disabled as a result of a road traffic accident. She and others were placed in an NHS home for long term disabled people and assured that this would be their home for life. Then the health authority decided that they were . .
CitedBamber, Regina (on the Application Of) v Revenue and Customs Admn 21-Dec-2005
. .
CitedRegina v Department of Education and Employment ex parte Begbie CA 20-Aug-1999
A statement made by a politician as to his intentions on a particular matter if elected could not create a legitimate expectation as regards the delivery of the promise after elected, even where the promise would directly affect individuals, and the . .
CitedBritish Oxygen Co Ltd v Board of Trade HL 15-Jul-1970
Cylinders containing hydrogen gas were being put on a trailer pulled by a tractor for the purpose of delivery to the premises of the purchaser. One of the issues before the court was whether the function of the hydrogen trailers and the cylinders . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte the National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Businesses Ltd HL 9-Apr-1981
Limitations on HMRC discretion on investigation
The Commissioners had been concerned at tax evasion of up to 1 million pounds a year by casual workers employed in Fleet Street. They agreed with the employers and unions to collect tax in the future, but that they would not pursue those who had . .
CitedMullen, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant had been imprisoned, but his conviction was later overturned. He had been a victim of a gross abuse of executive power. The British authorities had acted in breach of international law and had been guilty of ‘a blatant and extremely . .
CitedRegina v Inland Revenue Commission ex parte Preston; In re Preston HL 1984
Duty of Fairness to taxpayer – Written Assurance
The applicant was assured by the Inland Revenue that it would not raise further inquiries on certain tax affairs if he agreed to forgo interest relief which he had claimed and to pay a certain sum in capital gains tax.
Held: Where the . .
CitedIn Re Findlay, in re Hogben HL 1985
A public authority, and the Prison Service in particular, is free, within the limits of rationality, to decide on any policy as to how to exercise its discretions; it is entitled to change its policy from time to time for the future, and a person . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

VAT, Charity, Administrative

Updated: 11 November 2021; Ref: scu.381597

Kennedy v The Charity Commission: SC 26 Mar 2014

The claimant journalist sought disclosure of papers acquired by the respondent in its conduct of enquiries into the charitable Mariam appeal. The Commission referred to an absolute exemption under section 32(2) of the 2000 Act, saying that the exemption continued until the papers were destroyed, or for 20 years under the 1958 Act.
Held: The claim failed. As a matter of ordinary common law construction, the construction is clear: section 32 was intended to provide an absolute exemption which would not cease abruptly at the end of the court, arbitration or inquiry proceedings, but would continue until the relevant documents became historical records; that however does not mean that the information held by the Charity Commission as a result of its inquiries may not be required to be disclosed outside section 32 under other statutory and/or common law powers preserved by section 78 of the FOIA. The claim had been argued on the basis that section 32 of the FOIA can and should be read down to have a meaning contrary to that which Parliament clearly intended. It followed that no basis existed for any declaration of incompatibility with article 10 of the Convention.

Lord Neuberger, President, Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Carnwath, Lord Toulson
[2014] UKSC 20, [2015] 1 AC 455, [2014] EMLR 19, [2014] HRLR 14, [2014] WLR(D) 143, [2014] 2 All ER 847, [2014] 2 WLR 808, UKSC 2012/0122
Bailii, SC, SC Summary
Freedom of Information Act 2000 32(2), Public Records Act 1958 3, Charities Act 1993, Charities Act 2006, European Convention on Human Rights 2 10, Inquiries Act 2005
England and Wales
Citing:
At Information TribunalKennedy v Information Commissioner IT 14-Jun-2009
The claimant sought release of documents placed with the Charity Commission in connection with investigations into a charity.
Held: With certain exceptions, the applicaion failed: ‘once a public authority places documents it held prior to an . .
At AdminKennedy v Information Commissioner Admn 19-Jan-2010
The claimant journalist had made a freedom of information request to the Charity Commission as to its investigations of a charity under section 8 of the 1993 Act. The Commission claimed absolute exemption under section 32(2). He now appealed against . .
Appeal fromKennedy v The Information Commissioner and Another CA 12-May-2011
The claimant, a journalist, sought further information from the Charity Commission after the release of three investigations into the ‘Mariam Appeal’ and questions about the source and use of its funds. The Commission replied that it was exempt . .
CitedGuardian News and Media Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court CA 3-Apr-2012
The newspaper applied for leave to access documents referred to but not released during the course of extradition proceedings in open court.
Held: The application was to be allowed. Though extradition proceedings were not governed by the Civil . .
CitedAli Shipping Corporation v Shipyard Trogir CA 19-Dec-1997
In the case of an arbitration, there is a strong contractual presumption in favour of confidentiality and against non-disclosure. But this may be overridden by a court where necessary to protect a party’s rights against a third party or in other . .
CitedDepartment of Economic Policy and Development of City of Moscow and Another v Bankers Trust Company and Another CA 25-Mar-2004
The word ‘private’ in rule 39.2 means the same as ‘secret’. Lord Justice Mance said: ‘It may be equated with the old ‘in camera’ procedure, rather than the old ‘in chambers’ procedure.’ Privacy and confidentiality are features long assumed to be . .
CitedDoherty and others v Birmingham City Council HL 30-Jul-2008
The House was asked ‘whether a local authority can obtain a summary order for possession against an occupier of a site which it owns and has been used for many years as a gipsy and travellers’ caravan site. His licence to occupy the site has come to . .
CitedKay And Others v United Kingdom ECHR 17-Oct-2008
. .
CitedManchester City Council v Pinnock SC 3-Nov-2010
The tenant had been secure but had his tenancy had been reduced to an insecure demoted tenancy after he was accused of anti-social behaviour. He had not himself been accused of any misbehaviour, but it was said that he should have controlled his . .
CitedAttorney-General v Guardian Newspapers Ltd (No 2) (‘Spycatcher’) HL 13-Oct-1988
Loss of Confidentiality Protection – public domain
A retired secret service employee sought to publish his memoirs from Australia. The British government sought to restrain publication there, and the defendants sought to report those proceedings, which would involve publication of the allegations . .
CitedDerbyshire County Council v Times Newspapers Ltd and Others HL 18-Feb-1993
Local Council may not Sue in Defamation
Local Authorities must be open to criticism as political and administrative bodies, and so cannot be allowed to sue in defamation. Such a right would operate as ‘a chill factor’ on free speech. Freedom of speech was the underlying value which . .
CitedCrampton v Secretary of State for Health CA 9-Jul-1993
. .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Health, Ex Parte Wagstaff etc QBD 31-Aug-2000
The Secretary of State announced a public enquiry into the Shipman case. He did not say whether it would be a public enquiry. The bereaved families and media wanted it to be public, and contended that it had been invalidly constituted, that an . .
CitedRegina (Persey and Others) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Admn 15-Mar-2002
The applicants sought an order that the government enquiries into the foot and mouth outbreak should be held in public. They argued that the need to re-establish public faith made a decision not to hold the enquiries in public irrational, and that a . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Bugdaycay HL 19-Feb-1986
Three applicants had lied on entry to secure admission, stayed for a considerable time, and had been treated as illegal immigrants under section 33(1). The fourth’s claim that upon being returned he would been killed, had been rejected without . .
CitedRegina v Ministry of Defence ex parte Smith; ex parte Grady CA 3-Nov-1995
Four appellants challenged the policy of the ministry to discharge homosexuals from the armed services.
Held: Where a measure affects fundamental rights or has profoundly intrusive effects, the courts will anxiously scrutinise the decision to . .
CitedSmith and Grady v The United Kingdom ECHR 27-Sep-1999
The United Kingdom’s ban on homosexuals within the armed forces was a breach of the applicants’ right to respect for their private and family life. Applicants had also been denied an effective remedy under the Convention. The investigations into . .
CitedRegina (on the Application of Q and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 18-Mar-2003
The Home Secretary appealed a ruling that his implementation of section 55 was unlawful, having been said to be incompatible with human rights law.
Held: The way in which the section had been operated, by denying consideration and all benefits . .
CitedOffice of Fair Trading and others v IBA Health Limited CA 19-Feb-2004
The OFT had considered whether it was necessary to refer a merger between two companies to the Competition Commission, and decided against. The Competition Appeal Tribunal held that the proposed merger should have been referred. The OFT and parties . .
CitedRegina v Secretary of State for Health ex parte Eastside Cheese Company (a Firm) and R A Duckett and Co Interested CA 1-Jul-1999
The respondent had made an order banning the processing of milk products from the interested party’s farm into cheese products. Cheese manufacturers objected to the order. The order had been held unlawful, and the Secretary of State now appealed. . .
CitedSinclair Collis Ltd, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Health CA 17-Jun-2011
The claimants sought to challenge the validity of rules brought in under the 2009 Act as to the placement of cigarette vending machines in retail outlets. They said it was a a national measure restricting the free movement of goods. The . .
CitedRegina v Ministry of Agriculture Fisheries and Food and Another Ex Parte First City trading Etc QBD 20-Dec-1996
EU law principles do not apply in domestic law unless implementing EU law. Laws J said that: ‘Wednesbury and European review are two different models – one looser, one tighter -of the same juridical concept, which is the imposition of compulsory . .
CitedLeander v Sweden ECHR 26-Mar-1987
Mr Leander had been refused employment at a museum located on a naval base, having been assessed as a security risk on the basis of information stored on a register maintained by State security services that had not been disclosed him. Mr Leander . .
CitedGaskin v The United Kingdom ECHR 7-Jul-1989
The applicant complained of ill-treatment while he was in the care of a local authority and living with foster parents. He sought access to his case records held by the local authority but his request was denied.
Held: The refusal to allow him . .
CitedGuerra and Others v Italy ECHR 19-Feb-1998
(Grand Chamber) The applicants lived about 1km from a chemical factory which produced fertilizers and other chemicals and was classified as ‘high risk’ in criteria set out by Presidential Decree.
Held: Failure by a government to release to an . .
CitedRoche v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Oct-2005
(Grand Chamber) The claimant had been exposed to harmful chemicals whilst in the Army at Porton Down in 1953. He had wished to claim a service pension on the basis of the ensuing personal injury, but had been frustrated by many years of the . .
CitedSecretary of State for Defence v Al-Skeini and others (The Redress Trust Intervening) HL 13-Jun-2007
Complaints were made as to the deaths of six Iraqi civilians which were the result of actions by a member or members of the British armed forces in Basra. One of them, Mr Baha Mousa, had died as a result of severe maltreatment in a prison occupied . .
CitedSecretary of State for the Home Department v AF AN and AE (No 3) HL 10-Jun-2009
The applicants complained that they had been made subject to non-derogating control orders as suspected terrorists, but that the failure to inform them of the allegations or evidence against them was unfair and infringed their human rights. The . .
CitedSmith, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Defence and Oxfordshire Assistant Deputy Coroner (Equality and Human Rights Commission intervening) SC 30-Jun-2010
The deceased soldier died of heat exhaustion whilst on active service in Iraq. It was said that he was owed a duty under human rights laws, and that any coroner’s inquest should be a fuller one to satisfy the state’s duty under Article 2.
CitedRabone and Another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation SC 8-Feb-2012
The claimant’s daughter had committed suicide whilst on home leave from a hospital where she had stayed as a voluntary patient with depression. Her admission had followed a suicide attempt. The hospital admitted negligence but denied that it owed . .
CitedSugar v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another (2) SC 15-Feb-2012
The claimant sought release of a report prepared by the respondent as to its coverage of the Arab/Israel conflict partly for journalistic purposes, and partly for compliance.
Held: The appeal failed. Where the report was prepared even if only . .
CitedSmith and Others v The Ministry of Defence SC 19-Jun-2013
The claimants were PRs of men who had died or were severely injured on active duty in Iraq being variously fired at by mistake by other coalition forces, or dying in vehicles attacked by roadside bombs. Appeals were heard against a finding that the . .
CitedSturnham, Regina (on The Application of) v The Parole Board of England and Wales and Another (No 2) SC 3-Jul-2013
From 4 April 2005 until 3 December 2012, English law provided for the imposition of sentences of imprisonment for public protection (‘IPP’). The Court addressed the practical and legal issues resulting from the new system.
Held: The decision . .
CitedMatky v Czech Republic ECHR 10-Jul-2006
(French Text) Members of an environmental group sought access to the original project documents lodged with a government department. They wanted to compare the plans with revised plans which were currently the subject of an environmental assessment. . .
CitedTarsasag A Szabadsagjogokert v Hungary ECHR 13-Nov-2008
The Hungarian Civil Liberties Union sought access to details of a legal challenge filed by a Hungarian parliamentarian in the Hungarian Constitutional Court concerning the constitutionality of legislative amendments to the Hungarian Criminal Code. . .
CitedKenedi v Hungary ECHR 26-May-2009
(Second Chamber) The applicant historian specialised in the analysis and recording of the secret services of dictatorships, comparative studies of the political police forces of totalitarian regimes and the functioning of Soviet-type States. The . .
CitedGillberg v Sweden ECHR 2-Nov-2010
The applicant, professor in adolescent psychiatry had collected assorted data after having given undertakings to the parents of the children as to its absolute privacy. A sociologist had applied for and been given authority for its release by the . .
CitedShapovalov v Ukraine ECHR 31-Jul-2012
The claimant, a Ukrainian journalist said that he had (contrary to the Ukranian Information Act 1992) been refused access by administrative authorities during the 2004 elections to certain information and meetings. He relied on article 6 because the . .
CitedYouth Initiative For Human Rights v Serbia ECHR 25-Jun-2013
The Court heard of a refusal by the Serbian intelligence agency to provide the complainant with information as to how many people had been the subject of electronic surveillance by the agency. The Serbian Information Commissioner – whose role was to . .
CitedOsterreichische Vereinigung Zur Erhaltung, Starkung Und Schaffung v Austria ECHR 28-Nov-2013
All agricultural and forest land transactions in Austria required approval by local and regional authorities (in the Tyrol, the Tyrol Real Property Transactions Commission), the aim being to preserve land for agriculture and forestry and avoid the . .

Cited by:
CitedSandiford, Regina (on The Application of) v The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 16-Jul-2014
The appellant a British Citizen awaited execution in Singapore after conviction on a drugs charge. The only way she might get legal help for a further appeal would be if she was given legal aid by the respondent. She sought assistance both on Human . .
CitedA v British Broadcasting Corporation (Scotland) SC 8-May-2014
Anonymised Party to Proceedings
The BBC challenged an order made by the Court of Session in judicial review proceedings, permitting the applicant review to delete his name and address and substituting letters of the alphabet, in the exercise (or, as the BBC argues, purported . .
CitedYoussef v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs SC 27-Jan-2016
An Egyptian national, had lived here since 1994. He challenged a decision by the Secretary of State,as a member of the committee of the United Nations Security Council, known as the Resolution 1267 Committee or Sanctions Committee. The committee . .
CitedMichalak v General Medical Council and Others SC 1-Nov-2017
Dr M had successfully challenged her dismissal and recovered damages for unfair dismissal and race discrimination. In the interim, Her employer HA had reported the dismissal to the respondent who continued their proceedings despite the decision in . .
CitedDover District Council v CPRE Kent SC 6-Dec-2017
‘When a local planning authority against the advice of its own professional advisers grants permission for a controversial development, what legal duty, if any, does it have to state the reasons for its decision, and in how much detail? Is such a . .
CitedAhuja v Politika Novine I Magazini Doo and Others QBD 23-Nov-2015
Action for misuse of private information and libel. Application to have set aside leave to serve out of the jurisdiction. The defendant published a newspaper in Serbian, in print in Serbia and online. Though in Serbian, the claimant said that online . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Information, Human Rights

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.523195

Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain v Charity Commission: Admn 12 Dec 2014

The respondent had instigated a statutory inquiry under the 2011 Act into the claimant’s child safeguarding practices, and policies after compaints made to it. The Society now sought judicial review of that decision, and to production orders made to support it. The respondent argued that the Charity should first use the statutory remedies available to it in the First Tier Tribunal.
Held: The matter would clearly require consideration of assorted Human Rights issues, but the First tier tribunal would be able to include such matters. The courtw as accordingly satisfied that the discretion to allow judicial review should not be exercised.

Dove J
[2014] EWHC 4135 (Admin)
Bailii
Charities Act 2011 46
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedBaker, Regina (on the Application of) v Devon County Council CA 21-Dec-1992
The plaintiffs appealed against orders dismissing claims for judicial review. They had challenged the intended closure of residential homes for old people. The plaintiffs said that there had been inadequate consultation, and the Councils argued that . .
CitedLeech v Governor of Parkhurst Prison HL 1988
The House was asked whether a disciplinary decision by a governor was amenable to judicial review.
Held: The functions of a governor adjudicating upon disciplinary charges are separate and distinct from his functions in running the prison; . .
CitedRegina v Devon County Council Ex Parte Baker, Regina v Durham County Council Ex Parte Broxson CA 22-Feb-1993
A Local Authority considering closing a residential home did not have a duty to notify and consult with each resident who might be affected, but did have a duty to act fairly, and to give sufficiently prominent notice and sufficient time to allow . .
CitedShoesmith, Regina (on The Application of) v OFSTED and Others CA 27-May-2011
The claimant appealed against dismissal of her claim. She had been head of Child Services at Haringey. After the notorious violent death of Baby P, the Secretary of State called for an inquiry under the Act. He then removed her as director. She . .
CitedRegina (Great Yarmouth Port Company Limited) v Marine Management Organisation CA 2013
There is a presumption that the bespoke statutory regime will be deployed unless there are clear and powerful reasons which exceptionally justify judicial review being permitted. . .
CitedWillford, Regina (on The Application of) v Financial Services Authority (FSA) CA 13-Jun-2013
Where a separate specialist statutory regime has been established by Parliament, there would need to be powerful reasons or exceptional circumstances to bypass that regime and permit an application for judicial review.
The Court considered and . .
CitedWillford, Regina (on The Application of) v Financial Services Authority (FSA) CA 13-Jun-2013
Where a separate specialist statutory regime has been established by Parliament, there would need to be powerful reasons or exceptional circumstances to bypass that regime and permit an application for judicial review.
The Court considered and . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Judicial Review

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.542591

Attorney-General v Pearson: 1817

No Alteration to Charty’s Objects

A protestant dissenters’ meeting house in Wolverhampton which was declared by a trust deed to be held for ‘the worship and service of God’ was the subject of a dispute between the schismatic congregation. The issue was the nature of the worship denoted by those words and the occasion was the ejection of a minister.
Held: Referring to Craigdallie, Lord Eldon said: ‘if any persons seeking the benefit of a trust for charitable purposes should incline to the adoption of a different system from that which was intended by the original donors and founders; and if others of those who are interested think proper to adhere to the original system, the leaning of the Court must be to support those adhering to the original system, and not to sacrifice the original system to any change of sentiment in the persons seeking alteration, however commendable that proposed alteration may be.’

Lord Eldon
(1817) 3 Mer 353, [1817] EngR 645, (1817) 3 Mer 353, (1817) 36 ER 135
Commonlii
England and Wales
Citing:
ExplainedCraigdallie v Aikman PC 14-Jun-2013
A chapel was acquired with the subscriptions of a congregation which seceded from the Church of Scotland in 1737 and subsequently split over whether a magistrate might suppress heresy. Each of the rival groups claimed that the chapel belonged to . .

Cited by:
Not followedVarsani 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 . .
CitedKhaira and Others v Shergill and Others CA 17-Jul-2012
The parties disputed the trusteeship and governance of two Gurdwaras (Sikh temples). The defendants now applied for the claim to be struck out on the basis that the differences were as to Sikh doctrines and practice and as such were unjusticiable. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Trusts

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.187518

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 captal. 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 om 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 o Justice.

Moore-Bick VP CA, Tomlinson, Kitchin LJJ
[2016] EWCA Civ 938, [2016] WLR(D) 496
Bailii, WLRD
Inheritance Tax Act 1984 23, TFEU 63, Income Tax Act 2007 989
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. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Inheritance Tax, Charity, European

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.569895

Royal College of Nursing v Borough of St Marylebone: CA 27 Oct 1959

The College sought exemption from rates in respect of a nurses’ home saying that its objects made it a charitable organisation. It was not conducted for profit, but appeared to have two main purposes.
Held: Each of the purposes must be charitable for the exemption to apply. The one at issue was the object ‘to promote the advance of nursing as a profession in all or any of its branches’,

Morris, Romer, Willmer LJJ
[1959] EWCA Civ 1, [1959] 3 All ER 663, [1959] 1 WLR 1077
Bailii
Rating and Valuation (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1955 8
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedOverseers of the Savoy v Art Union of London Limited QBD 1894
AL Smith LJ considered the objects of the company: ‘If the other object be only a means to the one end . . then the Society has a sole and exclusive object and not another object subsidiary thereto’. . .
CitedGeneral Nursing Council for England and Wales v St Marylebone Borough Council HL 1959
The court considered how to decide whether the Council could claim exemption from rates.
Held: The court should restrict its consideration to the purposes as set out and not look to the actual activities. The relevant clause had as its main . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Rating, Charity

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.262822

Marwaha and Others v Singh and Others: ChD 18 Feb 2013

The claimants sought injunctions and declaratory relief relating to: (a) a purported amendment to the constitution of the Guru Tegh Bahadur Gurdwara (‘the charity’); (b) the completion of a new list of members of the charity; and (c) for amendment of the scheme applicable to the charity so as to facilitate an election of a new executive committee for the charity.

Peling QC HHJ
[2013] EWHC B6 (Ch), [2013] PTSR D14
Bailii
Cited by:
Appeal fromMarwaha v Singh and Others CA 6-Nov-2013
. .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Charity, Company

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.510168

Rendall v Blair: 1890

Where a statute requires leave to commence proceedings to be granted, a failure to obtain such consent does not automatically render the proceedings a nullity.
Bowen LJ said: ‘this section is not framed in the way in which sections are framed when it is intended that some preliminary steps should be taken before the action is maintainable at all’ and ‘It directs what ought to be done. Unless the duty is complied with by the litigant the court must hold its hand. But it does not oblige the court to close the gates of mercy upon the applicant, but enables it to stay proceedings until that consent, which as a matter of duty ought to be obtained in the first instance, is obtained at last.’
The legislature knows well enough how to provide that leave shall be a strict condition precedent to valid proceedings being issued and that clear words are to be used if that is intended, words perhaps even requiring a provision for the dismissal of the proceedings if the condition precedent is not satisfied. Without some such clear language being used the provision can be taken to be directory.
Bowen LJ
(1890) 45 Ch D 139
Charitable Trusts Act 1853 17
Cited by:
ConsideredIn re Saunders (A Bankrupt) ChD 1997
Very emphatic language was required in a statute before want of leave should, without more, result in proceedings being treated as a nullity. Leave could in appropriate circumstances be granted after the event notwithstanding the proceedings had . .
CitedSeal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police CA 19-May-2005
Mr Seal noisily objected to a neighbour blocking in his car. Police were called who took him into custody under the 1983 Act. He was released several days later, and eventually sought damages for his wrongful treatment. He had failed to first seek . .
CitedSeal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 4-Jul-2007
The claimant had sought to bring proceedings against the respondent, but as a mental patient subject to the 1983 Act, had been obliged by the section first to obtain consent. The parties disputed whether the failure was a procedural or substantial . .
CitedAdorian v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis CA 23-Jan-2009
The claimant received injuries when arrested. He was later convicted of resisting arrest. The defendant relied on section 329 of the 2003 Act. The claimant said that the force used against him was grossly disproportionate. The commissioner appealed . .
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.
Updated: 23 October 2021; Ref: scu.226024

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 trustee (L) declined to say how he would cast his decisive vote. When giving approval, the court had made an order for L to vote in favour of the transaction. He now appealed against that order.
Held: His appeal succeeded. He had not threatened to act contrary to his fiduciary duty, since he had stated that he intended to act in what he considered would promote CIFF’s charitable purposes.
A member of the charity was part of the internal workings of the charity and his powers were exercisable for the benefit of the charity. However, that the position might be different in relation to companies with a large membership, which it called ‘mass-membership charities’: ‘It does not necessarily follow that members of charities such as the National Trust also have fiduciary obligations. Since we are not dealing with such an organisation, we do not need to decide whether their members are in the same position as CIFF’s. There may possibly, moreover, be scope for argument as to whether it is less reasonable to expect those belonging to mass-membership charities to act exclusively in the charities’ interests. That said, it is far from clear that it should be legitimate for members of, say, the National Trust to vote to obtain benefits for themselves from an entity with exclusively charitable objects.’
The members of a charitable company have no proprietary rights. As to the content of their fiduciary duty, it was unnecessary: ‘to rule on the precise scope of the fiduciary duties owed by members of CIFF. It is sufficient to say that a member of CIFF owes, in our view, a duty corresponding to that specifically imposed on members of CIOs by section 220 of the Charities Act 2011. In other words, the member must exercise the powers that he has in that capacity in the way that he decides, in good faith, would be most likely to further the purposes of CIFF. It should be stressed that this duty is subjective: in other words, that what matters is the member’s state of mind (compare eg Regentcrest plc v Cohen [2001] 2 BCLC 80, para 120, dealing with company directors).’
Lady Justice Gloster (Vice-President of the Court of Appeal, Civil Division), Lord Justice David Richards and Lord Justice Newey
[2018] EWCA Civ 1605, [2019] 1 All ER 845, [2019] Ch 139, [2018] WLR(D) 423, [2018] 2 BCLC 478, [2018] 3 WLR 1470, 2018] WTLR 491
Bailii,
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 . .
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 . .
Appeal fromThe 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 . .

Cited by:
Appeal from (CA)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 . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2021; Ref: scu.618970

The 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 proposed transaction and ordered the remaining director to cast his decisive vote in favour of the transaction. In the ‘unique circumstances’ of this ‘extremely unusual’ case, the Grant was in the best interests of CIFF. The principal reasons given by the Chancellor were that the parties should not be allowed to renege on the deal they had made in good faith, that Ms Cooper would be contributing a further $40m to her new charity and that approving the Grant would bring finality and avoid further legal costs. He referred to the considerable talents of Ms Cooper. The Chancellor expressly stated that, while he had come to a clear conclusion that he should approve the Grant, he was ‘not saying that no reasonable trustee or fiduciary could disagree with [his] view’ that the Grant was in the best interests of CIFF or that ‘anyone who disagreed with [his] view would automatically be acting in bad faith’
Section 217 of the 2006 Act applies as much to charitable companies as it does to ordinary trading companies.
Sir Geoffrey Vos Ch
[2017] EWHC 1379 (Ch), [2017] WLR(D) 390, [2018] 1 BCLC 677, [2018] 2 WLR 259, [2018] Ch 371, [2018] 2 All ER 504
Bailii, WLRD
Companies Act 2006 215 217
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 . .
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. . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromLehtimaki 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 . .
At First InstanceLehtimaki and Others v Cooper SC 29-Jul-2020
Charitable Company- Directors’ Status and Duties
A married couple set up a charitable foundation to assist children in developing countries. When the marriage failed an attempt was made to establish a second foundation with funds from the first, as part of W leaving the Trust. Court approval was . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 25 August 2021; Ref: scu.588022

Gaudiya 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 the Court’s jurisdiction in respect of trusts in relation to the administration of a trust for charitable purposes. A foreign registered charity operating in UK is subject to Charities Act jurisdiction. The court found that the plaintiff was a Charity, and that the Attorney-General should be joined.
David Oliver QC
Times 01-Apr-1997
Charities Act 1993 33(2) 33(8) 96(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal fromGaudiya 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.80771

Seray-Wurie v The Charity Commission of England and Wales: QBD 23 Apr 2008

The defendant sought an order to strike out the claimant’s allegations of defamation and other torts. The defendants claimed qualified privilege in that the statements complained of were contained in a report prepared by it in fulfilment of its statutory duties.
Held: The action was struck out. It was clear that the publication was protected by qualified privilege at common law. Though, if the Reynolds criteria are satisfied in any particular case, there is no room left for considering whether the relevant defendant was malicious, at the same time an application for summary relief was less appropriate in a Reynolds type case. Had the claimant shown an arguable case for malice? ‘In order to survive, allegations of malice must go beyond that which is equivocal or merely neutral. There must be something from which a jury, ultimately, could rationally infer malice; in the sense that the relevant person was either dishonest in making the defamatory communication or had a dominant motive to injure the claimant. ‘ No such sufficient evidence had been produced.
‘It is accepted that the court should be wary of taking away an issue such as malice without its coming before a jury for deliberation. This step should only be taken where the court is satisfied that such a finding would be, in the light of the pleaded case and the evidence available, perverse.’
Eady J
[2008] EWHC 870 (QB)
Bailii
Charities Act 1993
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedReynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd and others HL 28-Oct-1999
Fair Coment on Political Activities
The defendant newspaper had published articles wrongly accusing the claimant, the former Prime Minister of Ireland of duplicity. The paper now appealed, saying that it should have had available to it a defence of qualified privilege because of the . .
CitedSeaga v Harper PC 30-Jan-2008
Public meeting gave no qualified privilege
(Jamaica) The appellant politician pleaded that his words about a senior policemen when spoken at a public meeting were protected from an action in slander by qualified privilege.
Held: The appeal failed. . .
CitedLillie and Reed v Newcastle City Council, Barker, Jones, Saradjian, Wardell QBD 30-Jul-2002
The applicants sought judicial review of a report prepared for the respondent. They had been accused of child abuse whilst working as nursery assistants.
Held: The report was fundamentally flawed, and almost deliberately designed to . .
CitedAlexander v Arts Council of Wales CA 9-Apr-2001
In a defamation action, where the judge considered that, taken at their highest, the allegations made by the claimant would be insufficient to establish the claim, he could grant summary judgment for the defence. If the judge considered that a . .
CitedKearns and Others v The General Council of the Bar CA 17-Mar-2003
The claimants had sought to recover from the General Council of the Bar damages for libel in a communication from the head of the Bar Council’s Professional Standards and Legal Services Department to all heads of chambers, their senior clerks and . .
CitedS v Newham London Borough Council CA 24-Feb-1998
A Local Authority which was relaying the facts underlying a list of people it felt were unsuitable to work with children to the minister has no immunity from a defamation action. . .
CitedSomerville v Hawkins 1851
It is necessary for a claimant who wishes to prove malice in an alleged defamation to plead and prove facts which are more consistent with its presence than with its absence. Mawle J said: ‘it is certainly not necessary in order to enable a . .
CitedTelnikoff v Matusevitch CA 1991
The court considered the element of malice in a defamation defence: ‘If a piece of evidence is equally consistent with malice and the absence of malice, it cannot as a matter of law provide evidence on which the jury could find malice. The judge . .
CitedTurner v Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures Ltd (MGM) HL 1950
A letter was published which criticised a film critic’s review of the week’s films.
Held: A person (including a corporation) whose character or conduct has been attacked is entitled to answer the attack, and the answer will be protected by . .
CitedWenlock v Moloney CA 1965
The plaintiff alleged a conspiracy to deprive him of his shares and interest in a company. Each side filed affidavit evidence raising issues of fact. With no oral evidence or cross examination on the affidavits, the Master, after a four day hearing, . .
CitedThree Rivers District Council and Others v Governor and Company of The Bank of England HL 18-May-2000
The applicants alleged misfeasance against the Bank of England in respect of the regulation of a bank.
Held: The Bank could not be sued in negligence, but the tort of misfeasance required clear evidence of misdeeds. The action was now properly . .

Cited by:
Appeal fromSeray-Wurie v The Charity Commission of England and Wales CA 3-Feb-2009
The claimant appealed against the striking out of his claim for defamation in a reort prepared by the defendants criticising his actions as chairman of a CAB. The action had been struck out on the basis of qualified privilege, and the claimant’s . .
CitedHughes v Risbridger and Another QBD 9-Dec-2009
hughes_risbridgerQBD2009
The defendants, employees of British Airways, sought summary judgement against the claimant in his claim for defamation in several emails. They had discussed the detention of the claimant under suspicion of theft at the airport, and claimed . .
CitedMakudi v Baron Triesman of Tottenham CA 26-Feb-2014
Appeal against strike out of claims for defamation and malicious falsehood. The defendant had given evidence to the Culture Media and Sport Select Committee of the House of Commons with material highly critical of the claimant, a member of FIFA’s . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 August 2021; Ref: scu.267065

The Independent Schools Council, Regina (on The Application of) v The Charity Commission for England and Wales: Admn 7 Oct 2010

Oral application by the claimant for permission to bring judicial review proceedings to challenge the lawfulness of guidance issued by the Charity Commission (‘the Commission’) regarding the operation of the public benefit test in the law of charity, as it has application in relation to independent schools.
Sales J
[2010] EWHC 2604 (Admin), [2011] ACD 2
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 08 March 2021; Ref: scu.434932

Southampton City Council v Southampton Medina Mosque Trust Ltd and Others: ChD 5 Oct 2010

The court considered competing claims for the ownership of a newly built mosque. The Council had agreed to it being built on its land and now sought a direction as to its future ownership. The first named defendant charity disputed ownership with a father and son as trustees of a different mosque. An original constitution appeared to have been adopted but then another was proposed. When a trustee dies, one of the defendants was appointed temprarily, but there was a dispute as to the confirmation of that appointment.
Held: The building agreement was in favour of named individuals as trustees of the unincorporated trust. However at a properly constituted meeting, the benefit of the agreement had been assigned to the newl formed charitable company. There should be a transfer accordingly.
David J
[2010] EWHC 2376 (Ch)
Bailii
England and Wales

Updated: 28 February 2021; Ref: scu.424869

Helena Housing Ltd v Revenue and Customs: FTTTx 1 Feb 2010

FTTTx CORPORATION TAX – ASSESSMENT – DEDUCTION FOR EXPENDITURE – Was the expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for its Schedule A business – No – Was the Appellant a Charity – No – Appeal dismissed
[2010] UKFTT 71 (TC), [2010] SFTD 515
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedPrudential Assurance Co Ltd v Inland Revenue Commissioners ChD 2002
The taxpayer company had entered into two contracts on the same day. The contracts involved a taxpayer buying a freehold property from developers coupled with a separate development agreement under which the developers would complete construction . .

Cited by:
At FTTTxHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
helena_hmrcCA2012
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 February 2021; Ref: scu.408925

English Speaking Union Scottish Branches Educational Fund, Re Judicial Review: SCS 27 Oct 2009

Lord Bonomy set out the condition to be passed for a charities trading activities to be chartable for exemption from rating namely that the Court should look at the whole of the evidence before it and decide, on a broad basis, whether the premises were being used wholly or mainly for charitable purposes, so as to give content to the full expression ‘wholly or mainly used’.
Lord Bonomy
[2009] ScotCS CSOH – 139, [2010] RA 227
Bailii
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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 19 February 2021; Ref: scu.377245

Kenya 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 phrase in the way contended for by the Appellant. As was pointed out in the English Speaking Union case and again in argument before us, the Appellant’s construction would substitute the word ‘solely’ for the word ‘wholly’. I see no reason why the statute should be thus narrowly confined. The natural reading and meaning of the words used, are, in my judgment, apt to cover not only consideration of the purpose of the use, but also the extent or amount of the actual use. It follows therefore that I would hold that the judge was right to take account of and place weight upon the extent to which the premises were used.’ However the district Judge’s decision could not be sustained: ‘ he took into account other factors which he should not have or which he did not analyse sufficiently.’ . . And ‘Whilst the judge was entitled to have regard to the English Speaking Union case and to look at the whole of the evidence before him and decide on a broad basis whether the premises were being used wholly or mainly for charitable purposes, and whilst the judge was correct to take into account the extent to which the premises were used, he also wrongly took account of other factors.’
Treacy LJ, King J
[2013] EWHC 54 (Admin), [2013] WLR(D) 23, [2013] 3 WLR 422, [2013] 2 EGLR 138, [2014] 1 QB 62, [2013] RA 75, [2013] WLR(D) 23
Bailii, WLRD
Non-Domestic Rating (Collection and Enforcement)(Local Lists) Regulations 1989, Local Government Finance Act 1988 43(6), Rating (Empty Properties) Act 2007
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedMakro Properties Limited v Nuneaton and Bedworth BC Admn 2012
A minor use will constitute rateable occupation for the purposes of liability to occupied rates. . .
CitedEnglish Speaking Union Scottish Branches Educational Fund, Re Judicial Review SCS 27-Oct-2009
Lord Bonomy set out the condition to be passed for a charities trading activities to be chartable for exemption from rating namely that the Court should look at the whole of the evidence before it and decide, on a broad basis, whether the premises . .
CitedGage v Wren 1903
. .
CitedWynn v Skegness UDC 1967
. .
CitedGlasgow 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 . .
CitedOxfam 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 . .
CitedWestminster City Council v O’Reilly and others CA 1-Jul-2003
The defendant sought to appeal against a decision of the High Court on a case stated by the Magistrates.
Held: A decision by the High Court on an appeal by way of case stated from the Magistrates was final, and no further appeal lay to the . .
CitedFarley v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (No 2) CA 22-Jun-2005
The Court of Apeal had previously considered an appeal from the grant of a liability order made by magistrates. It had become clear that the order had been made without jurisdiction.
Held: The order must be set aside. The court had no . .
CitedRevenue and Customs Commissioners v Berriman QBD 2008
The Court permitted parallel case stated and Judicial Review proceedings to take place before it. . .
CitedRegina (Magon) v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham CA 7-May-1998
Mummery LJ refused permission to seek Judicial Review on the ground that the case stated procedure is the appropriate one available to question the correctness of a liability order made by the Magistrates’ Court. . .
CitedBrighton and Hove City Council v Brighton and Hove Justices and Hamdan QBD 29-Jul-2004
Stanley Burnton J said that he had no doubt that the appropriate procedure for challenging decisions relating to liability orders is by way of case stated: ‘ the appropriate procedure to challenge the decision of the justices of 28 May 2003 was by . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 February 2021; Ref: scu.470484

Phonographic Performance Ltd v South Tyneside Metropolitan Borough Council: ChD 23 Nov 2000

Local authorities ran classes in which aerobics teachers used music for lessons. No licence was obtained for the performance of the music. They claimed to be ‘a club, society or other organisation the main objects of which were charitable or otherwise concerned with the advancement of religion, education or social welfare.’ In effect this was a claim that a local government was a charity.
Held: The defence could not succeed. The functions of a local authority would not normally be considered charitable. In this context, ‘social welfare’ was an inappropriate expression to describe such activities. Similarly the term ‘organisation’ in the Act, in this particular phrase, was to be read ejusdem generis with the words ‘club’ and ‘society’. It could not apply to a local authority. The function of a local authority is to carry out the administrative and governmental functions, in respect of its area. The legislature had thought it right to devolve those functions from national government. Those functions might include social welfare, but that was not its main purpose.
Neuberger J
Gazette 18-Jan-2001, Times 19-Dec-2000, [2000] EWHC 455 (Ch), [2001] 1 WLR 400, [2001] EMLR 446, [2001] RPC 594
Bailii
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 67
England and Wales

Updated: 15 February 2021; Ref: scu.84728

Gibbs 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 capable of being charitable, subject to the application of the 1976 Act. It therefore took effect as a gift to the Roman Catholic Diocese of Westminster on charitable trusts.
Lewison J
[2007] EWHC 3 (Ch)
Bailii
Race Relations Act 1976 34
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedHarrison v Gibson ChD 21-Dec-2005
The husband owned the family home. In a home-made will, he left it ‘in trust for’ his wife. She died leaving differing proportions to each child. On her death the children sought a declaration from the court as to their respective interests.
CitedMitford 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 . .
CitedIn 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 . .
CitedAttorney 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. . .
CitedGoodman 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, . .
CitedRegina v District Auditor No 3 Audit District of West Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council ex parte West Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council 1986
. .
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 . .
CitedRe 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 . .
CitedIn re Smith 1932
A gift ‘unto my country England’ was construed as a gift for the benefit of the inhabitants of England and, by analogy with the cases on gifts to a parish, town or city, as impressed with a trust that it be applied for charitable purposes only. The . .
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 . .
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 . .
CitedMorice 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: . .
CitedGlazebrook v University of Leeds ChD 1944
The court upheld a charitable gift despite its uncertainty. . .
CitedPeggs 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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 01 February 2021; Ref: scu.247686

Longborough Festival Opera v Customs and Excise: VDT 26 May 2005

VDT EXEMPTION – Cultural services – Eligible body- Preclusion from distributing profits – Management and administration on voluntary basis by persons with no financial interest in the body’s activities – Appellant company limited by guarantee having four ‘trustees’- Trustee undertaking to guarantee losses of Appellant – Same trustee making loans to Appellant – Same trustee owning premises in which Appellant stages operatic productions – Same trustee sole director and majority share holder of commercial company which had financial dealings with Appellant – Whether Appellant managed and administered on voluntary basis by person with no financial interest in its activities – No – EC Sixth Dir, Art 13A.2(a) – VATA 1994, Sch 9, Gp 13, Item 2(b), Note (2)
[2005] UKVAT V19096
Bailii
Cited by:
Appeal fromLongborough Festival Opera v HM Revenue and Customs ChD 27-Jan-2006
The charitable company sought tax exemption as an eligible body supplying music of a cultural nature.
Held: the company’s artciles prohibited distribution of profits, and the management as by directors having no financial interest. . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 24 January 2021; Ref: scu.228548

Sir 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.
Held: A charitable trust could co-exist with a non-charitable trust. ‘The distinction is between ends, means and consequences. The ends must be exclusively charitable. But if the non-charitable benefits are merely the means or the incidental consequences of carrying out the charitable purposes and are not ends in themselves, charitable status is not lost.’ The fact that some residue might revert to a non-charitable purpose on the trust coming to an end need not defeat the charitable nature of the trust. The trust was exempt.
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Millett, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Sir Martin Nourse, Sir Kenneth Keith
[2004] UKPC 13, Times 19-Mar-2004
PC, Bailii, PC
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRoyal 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 . .
CitedIn re Sir Robert Peel’s School at Tamworth CA 1868
Income under a trust was, until exercise of a power of revocation, if valid, subject to a mandatory trust for expenditure on the maintenance of a school.
Held: Unless and until the power of revocation was exercised, the trust was a valid . .
CitedChichester Diocesan Board of Finance v Simpson HL 21-Jun-1944
The court was asked whether a gift in a will to the trustees ‘for such charitable institution or institutions or other charitable or benevolent object or objects in England’ as they should select, was valid.
Held: ‘The fundamental principle is . .
CitedThellusson v Woodford 1799
A gift over to the Crown was held to be impressed with a charitable trust for the relief of the national debt and so charitable. . .
CitedNewland v Attorney-General 1809
Charitable purpose implied . .
CitedTwinsectra Ltd v Yardley and Others HL 21-Mar-2002
Solicitors acted in a loan, giving an undertaking as to its application. In breach of that undertaking they released it to the borrower. The appellants appealed a finding of liability as contributors to the breach.
Held: ‘Money in a . .
CitedNightingale v Goulbourn 1847
A testamentary gift to the Chancellor of the Exchequer was expressly impressed with a trust for Great Britain. . .
CitedBarclays Bank Ltd v Quistclose Investments Ltd; etc HL 31-Oct-1968
R Ltd were in serious financial difficulties. The company’s overdraft with the appellant bank was almost twice its permitted limit. The company sought a loan of 1 million pounds from a financier, who was willing to lend the company that sum provided . .
CitedAshton v Langdale 1851
Inference of charitable purposes. . .
CitedIn re Smith 1932
A gift ‘unto my country England’ was construed as a gift for the benefit of the inhabitants of England and, by analogy with the cases on gifts to a parish, town or city, as impressed with a trust that it be applied for charitable purposes only. The . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 12 January 2021; Ref: scu.193880

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

Updated: 19 December 2020; Ref: scu.89439

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

Updated: 17 December 2020; Ref: scu.78288

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.
Morison J
Gazette 11-Aug-1999, (1999) IRLR 405, [1999] UKEAT 537 – 98 – 1003, [1999] ICR 852
Bailii
Charities Act 1993 97(1), Employment Rights Act 1996 218(2)

Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.77664

Glen v Gregg: 1882

(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 . .
[2014] EWHC 55 (Ch), [2014] PTSR 769, [2014] WLR(D) 27

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.567258

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.
[1955] 1 QB 1
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 . .
[1955] 2 QB 379, [1955] EWCA Civ 1, [1955] 2 WLR 672, [1955] 1 All ER 708

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 December 2020; Ref: scu.272569

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.
Luxmoore J
[1935] Ch 148
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 . .
Times 24-Sep-97, [1998] Ch 341, [1997] EWCA Civ 2239

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 December 2020; Ref: scu.200674

Re Lepton’s Charity: 1972

[1972] Ch 276
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRe Camden’s Charity 1881
. .
[1881] 28 ChD 310

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 . .
[1998] EWCA Civ 630, [1999] Ch 219, [1998] 3 All ER 273

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 15 December 2020; Ref: scu.187520

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.’
Stamp, Orr, Bridge LJJ
[1979] 1 WLR 130
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 . .
[1978] 1 WLR 664

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 . .
[1980] UKHL 3, [1981] AC 1, [1980] UKHL TC – 54 – 413, [1981] AC 1, [1980] 2 WLR 416, 54 TC 413, [1980] TR 85, [1980] 1 All ER 884
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 . .
Gazette 06-May-92, [1990] UKHL 10, [1992] 2 AC 310, [1992] UKHL 16, [1993] Imm AR 112, [1992] 1 WLR 1052, [1992] 4 All ER 673
CitedHelena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
helena_hmrcCA2012
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 . .
[2012] EWCA Civ 569, [2012] PTSR 1409, [2012] WLR(D) 142

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 December 2020; Ref: scu.273192

Re Walker: 1901

[1901] 1 Ch 897
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 . .
[2005] EWHC 2706 (Ch), Times 10-Jan-06, [2006] 1 WLR 741

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 13 December 2020; Ref: scu.237755

In re Gillingham Bus Disaster Fund: 1958

Harman J
[1958] Ch 300
Charitable Trusts (Validation) Act 1954
England and Wales
Cited by:

  • Cited – Ulrich 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 . .
    Times 23-Mar-05

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 10 December 2020; Ref: scu.224377

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.
References: [1956] Ch 275, [1956] 2 WLR 556, [1956] 1 All ER 494
Judges: Dankwerts J
Statutes: Charitable Trusts Amendment Act 1855 29
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Bayoumi 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 . .
    (Times 04-Feb-03, Gazette 13-Mar-03, [2003] Ch 283, [2003] EWHC 212, [2003] 2 WLR 1287, [2003] 1 All ER 864, [2003] WTLR 317, (2003) 100(10) LSG 27, [2003] 1 P and CR DG21)
  • Disapproved – Bayoumi 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 . .
    (Times 05-Nov-03)
  • Cited – 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 . .
    ([1982] 3 All ER 525, [1982] 1 WLR 1109)

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.187942

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
References: [1788] EngR 210, (1788) 2 Cox 51, (1788) 30 ER 24 (B)
Links: Commonlii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.368510

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 ‘.
References: [1840] EngR 425, (1840) 2 Beav 313, (1840) 48 ER 1201
Links: Commonlii
Judges: Lord Langdale MR
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • See Also – 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 . .
    (, [1834] EngR 1042, (1833-1834) 2 My and K 576, (1834) 39 ER 1064)
  • See Also – 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. . .
    (, [1837] EngR 790, (1837) CP Coop 283, (1837) 47 ER 506)

This case is cited by:

  • See Also – The 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 . .
    (, [1841] EngR 283, (1840-1841) Cr and Ph 208, (1841) 41 ER 469)
  • Cited – Gouriet 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 . .
    ([1978] AC 435, , [1977] UKHL 5, [1977] 3 All ER 70)
  • Cited – Gouriet 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 . .
    ([1978] AC 435, , [1977] UKHL 5, [1977] 3 All ER 70)

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.309851

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.
References: [1834] EngR 1042, (1833-1834) 2 My and K 576, (1834) 39 ER 1064
Links: Commonlii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • See Also – 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. . .
    (, [1837] EngR 790, (1837) CP Coop 283, (1837) 47 ER 506)
  • See Also – 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 . .
    (, [1840] EngR 425, (1840) 2 Beav 313, (1840) 48 ER 1201)
  • See Also – The 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 . .
    (, [1841] EngR 283, (1840-1841) Cr and Ph 208, (1841) 41 ER 469)

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; 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.
References: [1837] EngR 790, (1837) CP Coop 283, (1837) 47 ER 506
Links: Commonlii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • See Also – 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 . .
    (, [1834] EngR 1042, (1833-1834) 2 My and K 576, (1834) 39 ER 1064)

This case is cited by:

  • See Also – 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 . .
    (, [1840] EngR 425, (1840) 2 Beav 313, (1840) 48 ER 1201)
  • See Also – The 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 . .
    (, [1841] EngR 283, (1840-1841) Cr and Ph 208, (1841) 41 ER 469)

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.313907

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.
References: Independent 20-Apr-1993, [1994] Ch 172
Judges: Morritt J
Statutes: Charities Act 1960 13(1)(d)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Hitchin 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 . .
    (, [2001] EWHC Ch 468)
  • Cited – Gibbs 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 . .
    (, [2007] EWHC 3 (Ch))

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 21 November 2020; 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.
References: Times 11-Oct-1996, [1996] STC 1218
Judges: Lightman J
Statutes: Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 506(1)
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Helena Partnerships Ltd v HM Revenue and Customs CA 9-May-2012
    helena_hmrcCA2012
    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 . .
    (, [2012] EWCA Civ 569, [2012] PTSR 1409, [2012] WLR(D) 142)

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 21 November 2020; Ref: scu.82355

In Re Tonbridge School Chapel: ConC 23 Feb 1993

A freehold consecrated chapel could be leased out by the owners. There is nothing at common law to prevent such an act. The owners of the school chapel, being a charity and having first obtained the consent of the charity commissioners, the only possible objection lay from the chapel having been consecrated and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the consistory court. Being a private chapel, however it was not consecrated for public worship, and was not governed by the Act.
References: Times 23-Feb-1993
Statutes: Pastoral Measure 1983 56(2)

Last Update: 21 November 2020; Ref: scu.82252

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.’
References: [1908] UKHL 335, 45 SLR 335
Links: Bailii
Judges: Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lord Macnaghten, Lord Robertson, and Lord Atkinson
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 21 November 2020; Ref: scu.621496

The Attorney General for Northern Ireland v Crawford and Another: ChNI 4 May 2016

The AG sought leave to appeal against a decision by the tribunal for the removal of a trustee of a police charity.
Held: Permission was given. The decision of the tribunal was open to proper criticism. The appeal raised several important issues.
References: [2016] NICh 8
Links: Bailii
Statutes: Charities Act (Northern Ireland) 2008
Jurisdiction: Northern Ireland
This case cites:

  • Cited – Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow HL 25-Jul-1955 ([1956] AC 14, [1955] 3 All ER 48, [1955] 36 Tax Cas 207, , [1955] UKHL 3, , [1955] UKHL TC – 36 – 207, 36 TC 207)
    The House was asked whether a particular transaction was ‘an adventure in the nature of trade’.
    Held: Although the House accepted that this was ‘an inference of fact’, on the primary facts as found by the Commissioners ‘the true and only . .
  • Cited – Eagil Trust Co Ltd v Pigott-Brown CA 1985 ([1985] 3 All ER 119)
    There is no duty on a judge, in giving his reasons, to deal with every argument presented by counsel in support of his case. When dealing with an application in chambers to strike out for want of prosecution a judge should give his reasons in . .
  • Cited – English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd; etc, (Practice Note) CA 30-Apr-2002 (Times 10-May-02, , Gazette 30-May-02, [2002] EWCA Civ 605, [2002] 1 WLR 2409, [2002] 3 All ER 385, [2003] IRLR 710)
    In each case appeals were made, following Flannery, complaining of a lack of reasons given by the judge for his decision.
    Held: Human Rights jurisprudence required judges to put parties into a position where they could understand how the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 21 October 2020; Ref: scu.564918

Singh v The Charity Commission and Others: ChD 22 Dec 2016

The court considered the circumstances under which a withdrawal of a case might be challenged: ‘(1) the rules do not prescribe any particular test for permitting discontinuance or, for that matter, for setting aside a notice of discontinuance; (2) a claimant’s desire to bring proceedings to an end where there is no counterclaim should be respected, not least because a claimant cannot be compelled to prosecute a claim; (3) the court has an inherent discretion including as to the timing of any discontinuance; (4) as with any judicial discretion, it may only be exercised in accordance with principle but is otherwise unfettered; (5) the court’s objective, both substantively and procedurally, is to achieve a just result according to law and to limit costs to those proportionate to the case; (6) the consideration required of the court is of all the circumstances and not merely those concerning only one party or only some of the parties; (7) when considering all the circumstances, conduct, particularly that aimed at abusing or frustrating the court’s process or securing an unjust tactical advantage, is relevant and may well be important, but it is by no means conclusive; and, (8) when considering all the circumstances, the court should also have in mind its realistic options, which may include imposing conditions while the proceedings remain extant.’
References: [2016] EWHC B33 (Ch)
Links: Bailii
Judges: Barker QC HHJ
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:

  • Approved – Stati and Others v The Republic of Kazakhstan CA 10-Aug-2018 (, [2018] EWCA Civ 1896)
    Appeal from an order setting aside a notice of discontinuance filed by the Appellants as claimants in proceedings under section 101 of the Arbitration Act 1996 to enforce a New York Convention award. He directed that the allegations made by the . .
  • Cited – Arcadia Group Ltd and Others v Telegraph Media Group Ltd QBD 8-Feb-2019 (, [2019] EWHC 223 (QB))
    Claimant’s application for leave to withdraw request for injunction to prevent publication of stories regarding matters subject to non-disclosure agreements.
    Held: Granted. An junction had been granted, but Lord Hain had disclosed protected . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 20 October 2020; Ref: scu.577846

Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Britain and Others v The Charity Commission: CA 15 Mar 2016

The Charity resisted a proposed investigation by the respondent regarding safeguarding of vulnerable beneficiaries, in particular children who are subject to or make allegations of sexual abuse by individuals who are connected with Jehovah’s Witness congregations.
References: [2016] EWCA Civ 154
Links: Bailii
Judges: Lordd Dyson MR, McCombe, David Richards LJJ
Statutes: Charities Act 2011
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 18 October 2020; Ref: scu.561129

New Deer Community Association v Revenue and Customs: UTTC 12 Nov 2015

VAT – Zero rating – Use for relevant charitable purpose – New building constructed by charitable community association comprising mainly changing room facilities and equipment storage area — Whether used as a village hall or similarly in providing social or recreational facilities – VATA 1994, Schedule 8, Group 5, Item 2, Note (6)(b) – Appeal refused.
References: [2015] UKUT 604 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 16 October 2020; Ref: scu.558952

Revenue and Customs v Longridge On The Thames: UTTC 13 Nov 2014

VAT – whether building intended for use solely for a relevant charitable purpose – charity with objects of educating young people in water borne activities – construction of training centre – whether construction services zero-rated – whether charity carrying on a business/economic activity – Section 30 and items 2 and 4 of Group 5 of Schedule 8 to VATA 1994 – Note (6) to Group 5
References: [2014] UKUT 504 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Jurisdiction: England and Wales

Last Update: 07 October 2020; Ref: scu.539411

Singh and Others v Teeng and Others: ChD 20 May 2013

Five trustees of a Gurdwara challenged the validity of the election of a new committee, saying that the election had not beenconducted properly.
Held: The trust was in fact, and by concession, entirely a charity, and therefore the chosen method of challenge was not available.
References: [2014] EWHC 4813 (Ch)
Links: Bailii
Judges: Purle C HHJ
Statutes: Charities Act 2011 115(2)

Last Update: 06 October 2020; Ref: scu.537772

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. ‘
References: [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
Judges: Rose DBE J
Statutes: Inheritance Tax Act 1984 23
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:

  • Cited – Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners CA 1954 ([1954] 1 Ch 672)
    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 – Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc v Inland Revenue Commissioners HL 1956 ([1956] AC 39, [1955] 3 All ER 97, 36 TC 126, , [1955] UKHL TC – 36 – 126)
    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 . .
  • Cited – HM Inspector of Taxes v Dextra Accessories Ltd HL 7-Jul-2005 (, [2005] UKHL 47, Times 11-Jul-05, , [2005] STC 1111, [2005] BTC 355, (2003) 77 TC 146, 77 TC 146, [2005] 4 All ER 107, [2005] STI 1235, [2005] Pens LR 395)
    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. . .

This case is cited by:

  • At ChD – Routier and Another v Revenue and Customs CA 16-Sep-2016 (, [2016] EWCA Civ 938, [2016] WLR(D) 496, )
    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 . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 05 October 2020; Ref: scu.536733

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

References: Ind Summary 05-Apr-1993, Times 23-Feb-1993, Gazette 07-Apr-1993
Ratio: 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.
Statutes: Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 703 709, Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1970 460(3)

Last Update: 06-Sep-16
Ref: 89221

The Pollen Estate Trustees Ltd Kings College London v HM Revenue and Customs; UTTC 3 Aug 2012

References: [2012] UKUT 277 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Warren J
Ratio: UTTC STAMP DUTY LAND TAX – Charities and Minister of the Crown relief – whether reliefs apply to interest in land acquired by a charity or Minister of the Crown as a tenant in common pursuant to a purchase made through a bare trustee on behalf of the charity or Minister and other non-charitable or Crown joint owners – No FA2003 sections 42 to 44,48 ,49,55, 75A, 76,77,85,103,107,117 and Schedules 8 and 16.
Statutes: Finance Act 2003
This case is cited by:

  • Appeal from – The Pollen Estate Trustee Company Ltd and Another v HM Revenue and Customs CA (Bailii, [2013] EWCA Civ 753, [2013] 1 WLR 3785, [2013] STC 1479, [2013] 3 All ER 742, [2013] WLR(D) 255, [2013] BTC 606, [2013] 27 EG 91, [2013] WTLR 1593, [2013] STI 2298, WLRD)
    The court was asked ‘If a charity acquires property in furtherance of its charitable purposes, or as an investment, it is entitled to relief against liability to pay stamp duty land tax (SDLT) on the purchase price.’
    Held: The modern approach . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 29-Aug-16
Ref: 466691

In re Ford’s Charity; 6 Jul 1855

References: [1855] EngR 661, (1855) 3 Drew 324, (1855) A)
Links: Commonlii
Coram: Sir Richard Kindersley V-C
Ratio: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.
Statutes: Charitable Trusts Act 1853 17
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Park v Cho and Others ChD (Bailii, [2014] EWHC 55 (Ch), [2014] PTSR 769, [2014] WLR(D) 27, WLRD)
    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 . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 21-Jul-16
Ref: 292583

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

References: [1865] EngR 431, (1865) 34 Beav 654, (1865) 55 ER 788
Links: Commonlii
Ratio:Lord Chelmsford L.C. 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.’
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Park v Cho and Others ChD (Bailii, [2014] EWHC 55 (Ch), [2014] PTSR 769, [2014] WLR(D) 27, WLRD)
    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 . .

(This list may be incomplete)

Last Update: 20-Jul-16
Ref: 281343

Catholic Care (Diocese of Leeds) v Charity Commission for England and Wales; UTTC 2 Nov 2012

References: [2012] UKUT 395 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Sales J
Ratio: TLC Provision of adoption services by a charity – discrimination against homosexuals and same sex couples who are potential adoptive parents – whether objectively justified under section 193 of the Equality Act 2010 – analogy with approach under Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights – whether permission should be granted for amendment of the charity’s Memorandum of Association.
Statutes: Equality Act 2010 193, European Convention on Hman Rights 14

Last Update: 25-Jun-16
Ref: 466704

The Vestryman of The Parish of St Marylebone In Middlesex v The Zoological Society Of London; 31 May 1854

References: [1854] EngR 566, (1854) 3 El & Bl 807, (1854) 118 ER 1343
Links: Commonlii
Ratio:The Zoological Society was incorporated by Charter ‘for the advancement of Zoology and Animal Physiology, and the introduction of new and curious subjects of the animal kingdom.’ They occupied land on which were buildings appropriated as receptacles for housing animals and birds, and as a museum for stuffed specimens. Three acres, not so appropriated, were cultivated as a flower garden. Refreshment rooms on the premises were occupied for the purpose of supplying refreshment to visitors, by M, who paid to the Society a rent for this privilege. The public were admitted, to the grounds, either by paying money upon each admittance, or by ticketa given to them by the fellows. Once in the weeks for three months in tbe year, the Society procured the attendance of a musical band.
Held: The Society was not exempt from rates, under stat. 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36, s. 1, the premises not being occupied exclusively for the purposes of science. The Society was supported in part by annual contributions from the fellows and subscribers. Each fellow was entitled to personal admission, with a specified number of companions on, every day, and could also give admission at oertain times by written orders and tickets, to which he was entitled: and fellows were also entitled to purchase tickets giving free admission to the bearer. Subscribers also were entitled to purchase annually an ivory ticket, admitting a named person of their family, with a companion,. Semble: that the annual contributions by the felloes were not voluntary contributions within the meaning of sect 1, inasmuch as the fellows and subscribers obtained a benefit not purely scientific, in consideration of the payments.

Last Update: 17-Jun-16
Ref: 293423

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

References: [1854] EngR 303, (1854) 18 Beav 475, (1854) 52 ER 187
Links: Commonlii
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.

The Trustees Of The British Museum v White; 8 Jul 1826

References: [1826] EngR 1073, (1826) 2 Sim & St 594, (1826) 57 ER 473
Links: Commonlii
William White, deceased, devised a freehold estate to trustees, in trust to sell it, and pay the proceeds, together with his residuary personal estate, to the Trustees of the British Museum, to be by them employed for the benefit of that institution. The question was, whether this devise was void under the 9th Geo, 2d, c. 361.
It was argued that the British Museum is not a charitable Institution. It was founded by the munificence of the State for the benefit of the public. Every gift for the use of the publie is not, necessarily, a charity. There must be something in the nature of relief to constitute a charity. Gifts to support a public bridge, and for the repair of sea-banks, have, on that principle, been held to be charitable gifts.
So schools for learning have been held to be charitable institutions ; not so schools of art (Duke, 128). Now this is a school of art. Besides, the museum is national property ; and, for that reason, it was held in Thelluseon v Woodford (4 Ves. 227), that the devise to the King, for the use of the Sinking Fund, was good.
Held: Despite these arguments, the gift was for charitable purposes, though the gift then failed onder the 1736 Act.
Statutes: Mortmain Act 1736, Statute of Charitable Uses 1601
This case is cited by:

The Attorney General v Price; 26 Nov 1810

References: [1810] EngR 575, (1810) 17 Ves Jun 371, (1810) 34 ER 143
Links: Commonlii
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. £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.
This case is cited by:

  • Cited – Scarisbrick’s Will Trusts, In re ChD ([1950] 1 All ER 143, [1950] Ch 226)
    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 . .

Helena Partnerships Limited v HM Revenue and Customs; UTTC 6 Apr 2011

References: [2011] UKUT B12 (TCC), [2011] UKUT 271 (TCC)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Warren J
UTTC Registered Social Landlord – objects for ‘benefit of the community’ – whether charity – no – availability of relief under s 505 Taxes Act – no
This case is cited by:

  • Appeal From – Helena Partnerships Ltd -v- HM Revenue and Customs CA (Bailii, [2012] EWCA Civ 569, [2012] PTSR 1409, [2012] WLR(D) 142)
    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 . .

Liverpool City Council v Attorney General; 15 May 1992

References: Unreported, 15 May 1992, Times 01-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.
This case cites:

  • Applied – Attorney-General -v- Poole ([1938] 1 Ch 23)
    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 . .

This case is cited by: