Charitable Purposes the Doctrine of Cy-pres Flashcards

1
Q

Check when ceased to exist

A

Initial and subsequent failure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Re Rymer [1895] 1 Ch 19

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Specificity of the institution prevented any general charitable purpose; gift failed and went back to settlor’s estate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Re Good’s Will Trusts [1950] 2 All ER 653

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Testator left money to fund purchase of land and building of homes; insufficient funds to carry out purpose at time; asked court if could be used for similar purpose; purpose outlined in the will was too specific so the gift failed and resulted back to settlor’s estate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Biscoe v Jackson (1873) 35 D 460

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Direction that £4,000 to be applied to soup kitchen and hospital; land could not be purchase, any general charitable intention shown to apply to similar charitable purpose – general intention to benefit the poor so the doctrine of cy-pres engaged

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Re Harwood [1936] Ch 285

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Money left to 2 organizations, when will made one society had existed (but closed before death) but another had never existed, while the specific institution had never existed there was a general intention to benefit the people of Belfast with promotion of peace… gift failed to other as too specific and ceased to exist prior to death – different approach to an organization defunct and one that had never existed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Re Spence [1979] Ch 483

A

Initial failure, some examples:

At time of will home existed, but by the time she died the home no longer existed (ceased to exist during lifetime), court considered benefit for people of home – “the absence of the specific leaves the general undisturbed” – specifity meant not general so had disturbed – so if made to specific institution then likely it will fail – funds went back to the settlor’s estate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Re Faraker [1912] 2 Ch 488

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Not case of cy-pres but whether charitable purpose lives on or not

Left money to charity to help the widows of Rotheri, however a number of charities in this area had been joined together, no monition of widows in the purposes of the consolidated charity where as there had been in the will – court took lenient approach as purpose lived on in the form of amalgamated charity – although organization not expressly for the benefit of widows, purpose still continued

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Re Slatter’s Will Trusts [1964] Ch 512

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Charity funds cease to exist?

Charitable purpose cannot be saved; money left for hospital in Oz which treated TB (daughter had attended), before death of testatrix the hospital ceased operation – this was a case of initial failure but where willing to overlook purpose that the testatrix was trying to achieve – she had wanted to benefit the hospital itself; must carefully draft wills to ensure that where property left to institutions that you ensure it can be performed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Re Finger’s Will Trusts [1972] Ch 286

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Incorporated vs unincorporated charitable institutions

Decision: Gift to UI Charity, both ceased to exist before testatrix’s death

Rule: Gift to the UIA was charitable and failed as where the purpose can be fulfilled, there is no initial failure, unless the existence of the institution is essential to the gift

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Re Sattherwaite’s Will Trusts [1966] 1 WLR 277

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Charity by association

Left estate to seven animal charities and one anti-vivisection society and the London animal hospital (which didn’t exist at death) – by association they could infer a general desire to give in a way which promotes kindness to animals – money applies cy-pre

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Re Jenkins’s Will Trusts [1966] Ch 249

A

Initial failure, some examples:

Similar facts to Re Sattherwaite’s; anti-vivisection not charitable as political so no general charitable intention

Rule: Where something is non-charitable you cannot make it charitable by association

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Subsequent failure

A

General rule: once charitable, always charitable (a trust that has settled property that has taken affect, always charitable, then will apply to similar institution if ceases to exist)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Re Slevin [1891] 2 Ch 236

A

Subsequent failure, some examples:

Testator bequeathed to orphanage, ceased to exist before gift vested, applied legacy cy-pres lapse in time did not effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

o Re Wright [1954] Ch 347

A

Subsequent failure, some examples:

Life interest to be held on trust to convalesant home, when died trust could be held, life tenant died and when they died the original purpose could not longer be carried out – taken at date of testatrix death and not the life tenant’s death, we know who the beneficiaries are – since the purpose had been practicable at the testatrix’s death it could be applied as subsequent failure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Re Tacon [1958] Ch 447

A

Subsequent failure, some examples:

In some circumstances you may have to consider future dates, but normally settlor’s death

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Re King [1923] 1 Ch 243

A

Subsequent failure, some examples:

Dealt with money left to install stained glass windows in church for memory of self and relations; issue as to whether surplus funds after installation of stained glass windows – surplus funds applied cy-pres for another stained glass window

17
Q

Charities Act 2011, s.62

A

Alteration of the charitable purpose, apply cy-pres

18
Q

Varsani v Jesani [1999] Ch 219

A

Effect of applying s.62:

Hindu sect split into 2 founders, dispute to beliefs so couldn’t practice in the same temple; applied for charity commissions to divide the funds into two so could both benefit; courts did this under s.62

19
Q

Re Lepton’s Charity [1972] Ch 276

A

Effect of applying s.62:

No change to purpose so can make alteration; financial settlement of modest amount; agreed to raise when trust increased

20
Q

Oldham Borough Council v Attorney-General [1993] Ch 210

A

Effect of applying s.62:

Either use s.62 or the court will exercise jurisdiction when original purpose of the gift is unaltered – but if removing provisions… that changes the original spirit then void