Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Charitable Trust, difficulties in defining what is a charitable purpose -…

- - - - main difference in Charities act is including economic hardship and preventing
- - - - objective
      - Cocks v Manners gifts to contemplative orders non-charitable as never going out to public
      - Gilmour prayers don't carry public benefit
    - - subjective
      - Maguire praying is good for society - public benefit
      - 1961 charities act- apply the rules of the religion in question
      - Simson gift to priest for work in parish was charitable
      - cult s3(10) principle object of making profit or psycholgical manipulation of its followers or for purpose of gaining new followers
      - 2009 act s3(4) presume of public benefit
    - - United Grand Lodge freemasonry not accepted (more like a cult)
      - Southplace gift to promote spiritualism did not advance religion
  - - - IRC v McMullen FA set up trust for schools to facilitate football - charitable as promoting physical education as part of education
      - Mariette gift for squash courts at Eton was charitable
      - Nottage trust for winner of yacht race not charitable can't be just sport
      - Dupree trust for chess tournament valid as educational
      - Independent Schools Council v Charity Commission must provide public benefit over and above educating their students - sharing facilities may be sufficient
      - Amateur Youth Soccer Assocation Canadian SC recent case- if purely for playing soccer - won't be charitable
    - - stricter in education than poverty
      - Oppenheim v Tobacco benefit must not be based on relationship with settlor
      - Worth Library library left for 3 named office holders in hospital - not charitable as confined to office holders
  - - - objective
      - Hummeltenberg donated property for purpose of spiritual media training and education - decision based on courts opinion
      - Robinson gift for elderly people over 60 allowed - within spirit of preamble
      - animals- Grove Grady not charitable as not in interests of man or public benefit
      - *Goodman v Salatash *gift benefiting inhabitants of town or parish charitable
    - - subjective
      - Cranston view of donor should be decisive
      - animals
        
        Wedgewood trust for more humane ways of slaughtering animals charitable - not for specific animals
      - Barrinton presence of limited number of fee paying patients, did not make it uncharitable
      - National tourism development v McLouglhan trust object of maintaining 3 golf courses for tourism - only maybe under 4th category - sport by itself not charitable - golf clubs private - need exceptional circumstance for it to be charitable
  - - - pre 2009 not as significant
      - Compton gift for beneficiaries with purely personal relationship cannot be charitable - personal nexus test
        
        exception developed
        
        Delany for poor relations and poor employees
        
        Scarisbrick trust benefiting relations under relief of poverty deserve separate treatment
        
        Dingle v Turner extended to benefit of poor employees
        
        Denison to employees wives and children
        
        In England likely still exists - AG v Charity Commission England and Wales
        
        unlikely to be the case as don't meet public benefit requirement under 2009 act - s3
      - oppenheim v tobacco securities person nexus test, public benefit
  - - - exception if promotes political objectives which relate directly to advancement of charitable purpose