Charitable trusts Flashcards Preview

Property Law 2 > Charitable trusts > Flashcards

Flashcards in Charitable trusts Deck (28)
Loading flashcards...
1
Q

Chain of analogy approach by tax bodies

A

Scottish Burial Reform v Glasgow (crematorium, burial, church)
Vancouver Regional FreeNet Association (internet highway)

2
Q

Bodies who decide on this

A

Attorney General
Charity Commission
Tax bodies

3
Q

Definition of charity

A

Preamble (Morice v Bishop)

4 heads of charity (Pemsel)

Within the spirit of the Preamble (National Anti-Vivisection Society v IRC)

4
Q

Requirement of Charities Act 2011 for definition of charity

A
S.2(1) of Charities Act 2011
Fall within s.3(1) (list of 13 charitable purposes)
Public benefit (s.4)
5
Q

Public benefit under S.4

A

No presumption
Identifiable benefit + section of the public + number of factors to be considered
Changed after R (Independent School Council) v Charity Commission case

6
Q

Identifiable benefit (question of fact)

A

Benefit that can be recognise or described, but need not be measured

Balanced against any harm that arises at the same time (National Anti-Vivisection Society v IRC)

Must relate to the charitable purpose

Incidental benefit may be relevant

7
Q

Section of the public requirement

A

Class of actual and potential beneficiaries must be a “public class” (if not, as good as private purpose trust)

Opportunity to benefit should not be unreasonably restricted
e.g. geographical area ok, charges for receipt of benefits ok but cannot be unreasonable

8
Q

Section of the public requirement

A

Class of actual and potential beneficiaries must be a “public class” (if not, as good as private purpose trust)

Opportunity to benefit should not be unreasonably restricted
e.g. geographical area ok, charges for receipt of benefits ok but cannot be unreasonable

9
Q

Application for political objectives

A

Incidental political objectives can be accepted e.g. children’s charity for awareness of domestic abuse

Hard to draw in real life

10
Q

Argument for political charitable trust

A

Other jurisdictions: AidWatch in Aus (public debate = benefit already), Greenpeace in NZ (court can make policy assessment)

Garton: scant authority for the rule, neglects benefits of politically active and organised civil society

11
Q

Argument for political charitable trust

A

Other jurisdictions: AidWatch in Aus (public debate = benefit already), Greenpeace in NZ (court can make policy assessment)

Garton: scant authority for the rule, neglects benefits of politically active and organised civil society

12
Q

Definition of poverty

A

Relative term (R Independent Schools Council v Charity Commission)

Moderate means or temporary financial hardship
Re Coulthurst - bank
AITC Foundation - investors
iRC v Oldham Training - unemployed in trade/business
Re de Carteret - annual allowance to widows/spinsters

13
Q

Subtle distinctions for the purpose for the poor

A
Re Sanders ('dwellings' for 'working class')
Re Niyazi's ('hostels' for 'workers')
14
Q

Public benefit for poverty

A

Liberal, can be smaller class of potential beneficiaries (Re Scarisbrick - son and daughter)

15
Q

Poor relation in poor employee cases

A

Dingle v Turner (pensions for poor employee)

Confirmed in Attorney v Charity Commission

  • relationship of potential objects to one or more individuals
  • their or family member’s employment or former employment
  • members of unincorporated association or families
16
Q

Poor relation in poor employee cases

A

Dingle v Turner (pensions for poor employee)

Confirmed in Attorney v Charity Commission

  • relationship of potential objects to one or more individuals
  • their or family member’s employment or former employment
  • members of unincorporated association or families
17
Q

Definition of education

A

Preamble: maintenance of schools of learning, free schools, scholars in universities, education and preferment of orphans

IRC v McMullen: provision of school facilities

Research if it involves dissemination of the results
Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England and Wales - law reports for legal research, public legal awareness
Re South Place Ethical Society - ethical principles
Re Koeppler - public and international issues

Living in Radiance - no contribution to factual knowledge or skill base (mediation and peace)
Re Hopkin’s - Shakespeare research

18
Q

Public benefit for advancement of education

A

Stricter than for poverty

19
Q

Definition of public for education

A

Strict approach: no personal nexus
(Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities Trust)

Suggested in Dingle OBITER that Oppenheim was wrongly decided

20
Q

Definition of public schools

A

More than minimum benefits to people who would not be able to afford fees (R(Independent Schools Council) v Charity Commission)

21
Q

Political purposes in education

A

Campaigning for change in law is not education, since it does not show both sides (McGovern v AG, Southwood v AG)

Education about government policy without partisan stance may be charitable (Re Koeppler’s)

22
Q

Advancement of religion

A

S.3(1)(c) of Charities Act 2011

23
Q

Definition of religion

A

Wide (Thornton v Howe)

Required faith in a god and worship of that god (Re South Place; problematic)

R (Williamson): seriousness/importance, coherent, typically involves belief in the supernatural, may not always be cogently expressed

Expanded in S.3(2)91): belief in god or no god

24
Q

Line of cases for Church of Scientology

A

1999 application:

  • supreme being ok
  • core practices do not involve reverence or veneration

Hodkin

25
Q

Current approach to religion

A

a. supreme being/entity/spiritual principle
b. relationship - worship, reverence, veneration
c. cogency, cohesion, seriousness, importance
d. identifiable positive, beneficial, moral or ethical framework

Gnostic Centre X
Druid Network Y
Jedi Order X

26
Q

Definition of advancement for religion

A

Taking positive steps to promote or spread the belief (United Grand Lodge of Ancient Free and Accepted Masons of England)

27
Q

Definition of public benefit for religion

A

Intercessory prayers not counted, must be legally capable of proof, edification confined to private space (Gilmour v Coats)

Celebration of religious rite in public space (Re Hetherington)

Spend lives in the word (Neville Estates v Madden)

Private practices not counted e.g. auditing, training (Scientology 1999)

28
Q

Purposes must be exclusively charitable

A

Chichester Diocesan Fund v Simpson