Chapter 6: Purpose Trusts Flashcards
- Introduction to purpose trusts
In this chapter we will explore the key exceptions to the beneficiary principle, namely charitable purpose trusts and non-charitable purpose trusts.
Charitable purpose trusts
(a) Charitable purpose trusts are recognised despite the absence of ascertainable beneficiaries
because they are for the public benefit.
Non-charitable purpose trusts
(b) Non-charitable purpose trusts have been recognised as valid in specific, exceptional cases.
These are known as the Endacott exceptions. This section introduces and compares these two types of trust. They are then considered in more detail later in the chapter.
1.1 Charitable purpose trusts
Charitable purpose trusts are not void for infringement of the beneficiary principle because there
is a mechanism for their enforcement. They are enforceable by the attorney general, with
practical responsibility for enforcement lying with the Charity Commission.
Charity
Charity is a status, not a legal form or structure. A charitable organisation can be established via various legal structures of which a charitable purpose trust is one option. For example, a charity could be established by way of a limited company. This Workbook focuses
only on charitable purpose trusts, but it is important in practice to be aware that charities can take other forms
1.1.1 Benefits of charitable status
There are a number of key benefits to trusts having charitable status. These include:
(a) No requirement to comply with the beneficiary principle
(b) More flexible rules on certainty of objects (ie certainty of purpose)
(c) No limit on their duration (ie they can exist in perpetuity)
(d) A rule known as the cy-près doctrine which allows the trust property to be applied for other
charitable purposes even if the specific trust fails
(e) Tax benefits: These are outside the scope of the module but are a major practical advantage
to having charitable status
1.2 Non-charitable purpose trusts
In order to be valid, the purpose of a non-charitable purpose trust must fall within a recognised
exception to the beneficiary principle. These exceptions apply only when a trust is created in a will
and were classified in the case of Re Endacott [1960] Ch 232.
The trusts recognised in Re Endacott are anomalous exceptions to the beneficiary principle. Only
very limited types of trust fall within this category and it is a closed class which is narrowly construed. No further exceptions are likely to be recognised. Unlike charitable purpose trusts, there is no recognised method of enforcement for non-charitable purpose trusts. They are therefore known as ‘trusts of imperfect obligation’.
1.3 Key differences between charitable and non-charitable purpose trusts
It is also important to be aware of the following differences between the two categories of purpose
trust:
(a) Enforceability: As we have already seen, charitable purpose trusts are legally enforceable while non-charitable purpose trusts are ‘trusts of imperfect obligation’.
(b) Certainty of objects (ie certainty of purpose): Charitable purpose trusts benefit from relaxed
rules of certainty of purpose.
(c) Perpetuity: Charitable purpose trusts can last indefinitely while non-charitable purpose trusts are restricted in duration by the common law perpetuity rules (discussed in the chapter
on ‘Perpetuity’).
1.3.1 Perpetuity
In general terms the law prevents people from tying up their assets on trust in perpetuity (indefinitely). This is for policy reasons – it prevents people with wealth locking their assets away on trust and therefore out of circulation in the wider economy. If they were able to lock assets away on trust in this way, they could effectively control their assets for many generations into the
future from beyond the grave.
Two related rules
There are two related rules in this area:
(a) The rule against remoteness of vesting: This applies to trusts with beneficiaries or charitable purposes as their objects.
(b) The rule against inalienability: This only applies to non-charitable purpose trusts.
1.3.2 Certainty of purpose
The rules in relation to certainty are much more flexible for charitable purpose trusts than for private trusts:
* It is sufficient that there is an intention to apply property for a charitable purpose.
* If there is uncertainty as to how this intention is to be carried out the trustees can direct that
the property be applied for such charitable purposes as they select.
1.3.2 Certainty of purpose
For charitable purpose trusts, the court will strive to resolve any uncertainty and hold the trust
valid once it has established charitable intent.
* The Charity Commission or the court can provide a ‘scheme’ to specify the charitable
purposes the property should be applied to. This is not true of non-charitable purpose trusts. Such trusts will be void for uncertainty of objects if the purpose (or means of achieving the purpose) is unclear.
Key case: Re Astor’s Settlement Trusts [1952] Ch 534
Re Astor’s Settlement Trusts is an example of a case where an attempted non-charitable purpose
trust was found to be void in part because the intended purposes were too uncertain.
Key case: Re Astor’s Settlement Trusts [1952] Ch 534
Facts: A trust of substantially all the shares in The Observer Ltd were held on trust for various noncharitable purposes including:
* ‘The maintenance […] of good understanding sympathy and co-operation between nations’
* ‘The preservation of the independence and integrity of newspapers’
* ‘The control, publication […] financing or management of any newspapers, periodicals, books,
pamphlets or publications’
* ‘The protection of newspapers […] from being absorbed […] or being tied by finance or
otherwise to special […] views […] inconsistent with the highest integrity and independence.’
Key case: Re Astor’s Settlement Trusts [1952] Ch 534 Judgement
Held: Roxburgh J considered the purposes too inherently uncertain to be performed and rejected
the argument that the trustees could simply disregard those purposes which were insufficiently defined.
Counsel’s argument that the trustees could apply to the court for a ‘scheme’ for the administration of the trust, as is available for charitable purpose trusts, was rejected on the basis that such a scheme would require a ‘custodian’ equivalent to the attorney general, but there is no
such equivalent for non-charitable purpose trusts.
Endacott exception, leading Roxburgh J to conclude
The trust also failed for not falling within a recognised Endacott exception, leading Roxburgh J to
conclude:
[…] while I have reached my decision on two separate grounds, both, I think, have their origin in a single principle, namely, that a court of equity does not recognise as valid a trust which it cannot both enforce and control. This seems to me to be good equity and good sense
- Charitable purpose trusts
2.1 Introduction to charitable purpose trusts
To have charitable status a trust must:
(a) Be for a charitable purpose;
(b) Satisfy the public benefit test; and
(c) Be wholly and exclusively charitable.
2.2 Charitable purposes
There is an extensive body of case law on charitable purposes, much of which refers to the charitable purposes listed in the preamble to the Charitable Uses Act 1601. Although the law on charities was codified in the Charities Act 2006 and consolidated in the Charities Act 2011, the history of the case law is important because many modern cases will still be interpreted by
reference to the cases predating the legislation
Heads of charity
For around 300 years, the case law on charitable purposes developed with reference to the preamble to the 1601 Act, with four traditional ‘heads of charity’ emerging:
(a) The relief of poverty
(b) The advancement of education
(c) The advancement of religion
(d) Other purposes beneficial to the community
These were subsequently recognised to be a ‘checklist’ only, with other purposes capable of being
charitable as long as they fell within the spirit of the preamble.
s 2 of the Charities Act 2011
The law has now been codified, with s 2 of the Charities Act 2011 providing that a charitable
purpose is a purpose which:
(a) Falls within s 3(1); and
(b) Is for the public benefit.
There are 12 specific heads of charity set out under s 3(1) as well as a wide additional head of charity which codifies the common law principle of recognising additional charitable purposes falling within the spirit of the law.
Heads of charity
The 12 specific heads of charity are:
(a) The prevention or relief of poverty
(b) The advancement of education
(c) The advancement of religion
(d) The advancement of health or the saving of lives
(e) The advancement of citizenship or community development
(f) The advancement of the arts, culture, heritage or science
(g) The advancement of amateur sport
Heads of charity
(h) The advancement of human rights, conflict resolution or reconciliation or the promotion of
religious or racial harmony or equality and diversity
(i) The advancement of environmental protection or improvement
(j) The relief of those in need because of youth, age, ill-health, disability, financial hardship or
other disadvantage
(k) The advancement of animal welfare
(l) The promotion of the efficiency of the armed forces of the Crown or of the efficiency of the
police, fire and rescue services or ambulance services
2.2.1 The prevention or relief of poverty
There is no definition of ‘poverty’ in the Charities Act 2011 and it is therefore interpreted using
existing case law from which some key principles can be derived.
Poverty means ‘going short’
This idea from Re Coulthurst is now reflected in Charity Commission guidance which provides
that:
it is likely to be charitable to relieve the poverty or financial hardship of anyone who does not
have the resources to provide themselves […] with the normal things of life which most people
take for granted.