Mind map

Charities

zoe mckeown law llb English

Map content

Charities

Benefits of charitable purpose trusts
- Tax exempt from: Capital gains, income, corporation, stamp duty
- Exempt from perpetuity rule
- Exempt from beneficiary principle
  - Morice v Bishop of Durham
  - Instead trust is enforced by the Attorney General
Unincorporated association
Company
Trust
Definition of charitable status
- S.2 Charities Act 2011
  - Activity must be recognised by law as charitable
    - Historical
      - Charitable Uses Act 1601
        Distressed maidens" "repair of churches"
      - Pemsel 1891
        Relief of poverty
        Importance of wording
        Re Niyazis will trusts
        "working men' & 'Hostel' inferred low income
        Re Sanders
        'working classes' not enough to infer poverty
        Narrow class upheld
        Dingle v Turner
        Charity for poor employees upheld
        see also
        Re Segelman
        26 "poor & needy' allowed as included future dependants
        Advancement of religion
        S.3(2) Charities Act 2011
        Definition: Belief in one or more god or religion without belief in a god (Buddhism)
        Thornton v Howe
        Pregnant with next messiah, the foolishness of belief is irrelevant if it is a sincerely held belief
        Courts reluctant to assess value of religion but assumes some religion is better than none
        Neville Estates v Madden
        Gilmour v Coats
        Cloistered nuns "prayers for public' held to be intangible benefit=failed
        Re Hetherington
        Public masses for family members accepted as performed in public
        Advancement of education
        Re Shaw
        Lady Shaw= Finishing school = accepted
        Re Shaw
        George Bernard= Extend alphabet = Rejected
        McMullen
        Education: instruction, training, & practice
        Definition
        Re Hopkins
        Research in to authorship of Shakespeare works
        Re Dupree
        Chess tournament "Keen not to create slippery slope, 'draughts, ludo etc resulting in stamp or egg collecting"
        Other purposes beneficial to community
        Presumption of public benefit of heads 1-3
    - S.3(1) Charities Act 2011
      - (a) - (c) and (m) = Pemsel
        (e) Community
        (f) Arts, Culture, Heritage or Science
        (g) Amateur sports
        (h) Human rights/ promotion of diversity
        (i) Environmental
        (j) Needy- Youth, Aged, ill, Disabled
        (k) Animal welfare
        (l) Armed forces/ emergency services
        (m) All other charitable purposes
        See
        S.3(1)(h)
  - Must be for a recognised public benefit
    - Cause must be tangible benefit to the public
      - Re Pinion
        "Worthless pile of junk"
    - Must be accessible to section of public
      - very lenient for poverty,
        Education
        Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities
        Education for employees children = Failed on personal nexus with doner=employer
        Rowntree Memorial Trust
        Accepted despite facts similar to Oppenheim
        Re Koettgen
        Educational trust open to everyone but 75% was to be applied to a private class = accepted as preference did not amount to exclusion
        Poverty
      - Re Compton
        Children- personal nexus/not section of public
      - Re Scarisbrick
        Donors poor relations sufficient to satisfy public benefit
    - S.4 Charities Act 2011
      - S.4(2) No presumption of benefit as in Pemsel
  - Must be exclusively charitable
    - National Anti-Vivisection Society v. IRC
      - Cannot pursue politic aims as main purpose
        Amnesty international
        Acceptable if political aim is ancillary
        RSPCA
        Stonewall-LGBT charity
        Mc Govern
        Aims that support: political party, law changing, change policy
    - Any non charitable purposes must be ancillary to the main charitable objective
S.63 Charities Act 2011
- Allows appeal for failed charitable gifts to be applied Cy-pres
  - Cy-pres scheme
    - Initial failure
      - Subsequent failure
        Gift/trust is effective but charity ceases after testators death but before legacy paid
        Purpose posible at death but becomes subsequently impossible
        Trust surplus after purpose achieved
      - Charity never existed
      - Re Harwood
      - Charity ceases b4 testers death
      - Insufficient funds
      - Purpose impossible - no planning permission etc
      - General charitable intent must be found
      - Biscoe v Jackson
        Soup kitchen-General charitable intent
S.62 Charities Act 2011
- Cy-pres can be used if it is impossible, impractical, legal or inefficient for trust to be carried out
Failed Gifts
- Re Fakarer
  - Lapsed gifts with a general charitable intention can be saved if original charitable company/unincorp assoc amalgamated with another charity which took over its assets & purposes before death of testator
  - Amalgamation
- Re Vernons WT
  - Gift to unincorporated association that has ceased but its purposes are being carried out by another body, gift can be transferred to that. If purposes have discontinued consider Cy-pres.
- Abbott fund
  - Fund collected for maintenance of 2 ladies= surplus after their death. Held = Contributors/settlor never intended outright gift so surplus resulted back to contributors
- Re Fingers
  - Legacy to charitable company will be construed as gift unless testator specified purpose. if company ceases=resulting trust back to estate unless Faraker or cy-pres can apply

Information

Description: llb law Mind Map on Charities, created by zoe mckeown on 29/05/2016.
Created by: zoe mckeown · May 2016
Updated: Jun 1, 2016
Views: 0
Rating

Charities

Map content

Information

Feedback

What do you think of the new look?