Mind map
Purpose and Charitable Trusts
Map content
Purpose and Charitable Trusts
Beneficiary Principle
- Morice v Bishop of Durham
- For a trust to be valid it must be for the benefit of ascertainable individuals
- Must be beneficiary to enforce beneficial obligation of trustee
- Re Astor's
- Exceptions
- Charitable trusts
- Re Denley
- Where a trust is made for a purpose which is for the direct or indirect benenfit of ascertainable individuals
- Affirmed in Re Grant's Wills Trusts
- No difference between Re Denley and discretionary trust - yes there is Denley trust allows mere administrative discretion - Discretionary trusts allow trustees to decide who is a beneficiary
- Affirmed in Re Grant's Wills Trusts
- Where a trust is made for a purpose which is for the direct or indirect benenfit of ascertainable individuals
- Put another way, trusts cannot be for a purpose
- Morice v Bishop of Durham
Gifts to unincorporated associations
- Way around BP?
- Create a trust for the benefit of a UA which aims to promote the wanted purpose
- Group of individuals who don't create a legal entity - i.e. uni societies
- Criteria displayed in Conservative and Unionist Central Office v Bursell
- 1. Two or more persons bound together for non-business purposes 2. Mutual undertakings and obligations 3. Rules to identify who controls it and its finances 4. Each member enters the contract voluntarily
- Contract Holding Theory
- Re Recher's Wills Trust
- Gifts made to UAs will go to the trustee-treasurer and distributed amongst the UA as is stated in their mutual contract
- 3 different ways of distribution
- Neville Estates v Madden
- A gift to individual members as co-owners
- A gift to individual members subject to their contractual rights and liabilities to each other
- The gift is held on trust for the purposes of the association as a whole as a quasi-corporate entity
- Neville Estates v Madden
- Re Recher's Wills Trust
- Way around BP?
Charitable trusts
- Charitable Purpose
- DIngle v Turner
- 1. The character of the purpose must be charitable 2. The purpose must be beneficial on balance 3. The purpose must benefit a section of the public 4. The purpose must be exclusively charitable and not political 5. The purpose must not seek to make a profit
- 1. Character
- Charities Act 2011
- Poverty
- Does not mean destitution
- People who may go short
- Re Coulthurst
- Those in limited means
- Re Gardom
- Decayed actors
- Spiller v Maude
- People who may go short
- Can benefit a class but not if some aren't poor
- 'Poor employees' is ok
- Dingle v Turner
- Working class not as not all are poor
- Re Sander's Will Trusts
- 'Poor employees' is ok
- Does not mean destitution
- Education
- Includes education in normal sense as well as others
- Artistic education
- Royal Choral Society v IRS
- Museums
- British Museums Trustees v White
- Sports at schools
- Re Mariette
- Student Unions
- London Hospital Medical College v IRS
- Professional bodies which advance education
- Royal College of Surgeons v National Provincial Bank
- Research
- McGovern v A-G
- Artistic education
- Includes education in normal sense as well as others
- Relgion
- Not distinguished on quality
- Neville Estates v Madden
- Distinguishes between what is and isn't religion i.e. Scientology
- Original position is scientology is not a religion
- Ex Parte Segerdal
- Australian case against that view
- Church of the New Faith v Comr
- s3(2) Charities Act
- Likely to be classified as religion now
- Hodgkins v Registrar General for Births
- Original position is scientology is not a religion
- Not distinguished on quality
- Poverty
- Charities Act 2011
- DIngle v Turner
- Public Benefit
- Independent Schools case
- Discussion around that
- Must be beneficial on balance
- Benefit must outweigh any detriment
- National Anti-vivisection Society v IRS
- Benefit must outweigh any detriment
- Must benefit a section of the public, not private individuals
- Can be for people in a geographical location or the children of those in certain professions but not companies
- Oppenheim Tobbaco
- Personal Nexus test
- If a class is defined by a personal nexus to an individual it is not a sufficient portion of the public
- Oppenheim Tobacco
- If a class is defined by a personal nexus to an individual it is not a sufficient portion of the public
- Can be for people in a geographical location or the children of those in certain professions but not companies
- Independent Schools case
- Charitable Purpose
Information
- Description
- A-Levels Trusts and Equity (Charitable/Purpose trusts) Mind Map on Purpose and Charitable Trusts, created by Daniel Hill on 19/04/2015.
- Created by
- Daniel Hill
- Views
- 15
- Rating