Equity & Trusts - Charitable Trusts Flashcards
This flashcard deck was created using Flashcardlet's card creator
s2 PAA 2009
Rule against inalienability does not apply to charitable trusts
Morice v Bishop of Durham
Trusts need to have identifiable Bs. Charitable trusts are enforced by the A-G.
Christ’s Hospital v Grainger
Gift-overs from one charity to another may fall outside the PP
s3 CA 2011(previously s2(2) CA 2006)
13 heads of charity
Pemsel’s Case
Original 4 heads of charity:
- Poverty
- Education
- Religion
- Benefit to the community
Re Coulthurst
Poverty need not mean deprivation; going short will suffice
Re Hopkins
Education must be of benefit to researcher/wider community of knowledge
Thornton v Howe
Religion does not require beliefs to be valid
Church of Scientology v Kaufmann
Beliefs must not amount to ‘pernicious nonsense’
s4 CA 2011
Purpose must serve public benefit
s4(1) CA 2006
Charities Commission must issue guidance on what constitutes public benefit:
- Benefits must be obvious
- benefits must be related to the aims
Re Smith
Limitation to a geographic area will be of sufficient public benefit
Re Girls’ Public Day School Trust
Public benefit excludes any organisation making a private profit
Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities
Class may not be connected by a ‘personal nexus’
Re Compton
Trusts for named beneficiaries will probably not be of public benefit
Re Koettgen
Preferential treatment may be given to one class, but not at the exclusion of others (75% max)
s11 CA 2011
Purpose must be exclusively charitable
Baldry v Feintuck
Trusts that seek to change government policy are not exclusively charitable
McGovern v A-G
Trust will succeed if political motives are only ancillary to aims
Chichester Diocesan Fund v Simpson
Imprecise wording will cause charitable gift to fail ‘charitable OR benevolent’
Guild v IRC
Courts may construe wording to allow purpose ‘or some similar [charitable] purpose’
Re Coxon
Courts may sever charitable/non-charitable purposes to preserve validity
Salisbury v Denton
Presumed equitable severance of 50:50 (equity is equality) unless trust expressly provides otherwise
Re Gillingham Bus Disaster
Uncharitable purpose gives rise to RT in favour of donors
Re West Sussex Constabulary Fund
Automatic RT will not apply if impractical to return gift to donor, e.g. anonymous. Instead, it passes as bona vacantia to Crown
Re Rymer
Donor must show general charitable intention for cy-pres to apply
Re Spence
Naming charity specifically will defeat general intention
Re Harwood
Presumption of general charitable intention if donee never really existed
Re Faraker
Presumption of general charitable intention if donee has merged with another to carry on it’s work
Re Finger’s WT
Presumption of general charitable intention if UA no longer exists, but gift can be construed as for a purpose
Re Abbott
Surplus funds will be held on RT for donor
Re Osoba
Surplus funds will pass to B if it can be shown that donor intended to part with gift absolutely
Re Wright
If a purpose ceases to be charitable, the gift will always be applied cy-pres. It never returns to donor’s residuary legatees
Re Slevin
Gift will be applied cy-pres if UA ceases to exist before gift can be made