-
Overview
-
Advantages
- Not subject to beneficiary principle
-
State provides enforcement
- Attorney-General
- Charity Commission
- Can last indefinitely
-
Not subject to certainty of objects rule
- Must have exclusively charitable objects
- Tax benefits
-
Charitable status
- Can exist as companies
- Or unincorporated associations
- Charity Commission makes decision on status
-
Prevention or relief of poverty
- No rigid test of poverty
-
'Persons who have to go short'
- Re Coulthurst [1951]
-
Includes help for temporary crisis
- Re Segelman [1995]
-
Need not explicitly mention poverty
- Will be inferred
-
eg 'working men's hostel'
- Re Niyazi's Will Trusts [1978]
-
Must not benefit affluent as well as poor
- Would not be exclusively charitable
-
Advancement of education
- Includes teaching, scholarships etc
- Includes museums, zoos etc
- May charge fees but not make profit
-
Fee paying schools must ensure poor can benefit
- s3 CA 2006
-
Playing games may be educational
-
eg chess
- Re Dupree [1945]
-
Sports in schools
- IRC v McMullen [1981]
-
Research may be acceptable
-
Whether Francis Bacon was author of Shakespeare's works
- Re Hopkins' WT [1965]
-
40 letter alphabet
- Re Shaw [1957]
-
Advancement of the arts, culture, heritage or science
-
Assessment of merit
-
Re Pinion (Dec'd) [1965]
- Work described as 'mass of junk'
- Court will listen to expert advice
-
Advancement of religion
- Includes belief in more than one, or no, god
-
Might include humanism, contrary to case law
- Re South Place Ethical Society [1980]
- Must take positive steps to sustain and increase religious belief
- Must not be subversive of morality
-
Health and relief of those in need by reason of youth, age, disability etc
- Advancement of health or saving of lifes
- Hospitals, research, facilities for professionals
-
Relief implies need attributable to their condition
- Joseph Rowntree Memorial Trust Housing Assoc v A-G [1983]
-
Advancement of amateur sport
- Must involve physical or mental skill or exertion
- Clubs with small membership unlikely to qualify
-
Advancement of human rights, conflict resolution or reconciliation or the promotion of religious or racial harmony or equality and diversity
- Human rights no longer considered political
-
Advancement of animal welfare
- Animal sanctuaries, zoos
- Keeping stray animals off street
-
Other purposes
- Analogous to any of other heads
- Previous case law
- Analogous to previous case law
-
Recreational Charities Act 1958
-
For a charitable purpose
- Provides facilities for recreation or leisure
-
In interests of social welfare
- Object is to improve conditions of life
- AND either have a need by reason of youth, age, infirmity, disability, poverty or social and economic circumstances
- OR is open to public, or male or female members of public
- and there is a public benefit
-
For public benefit
- see later section
- Exclusively charitable
-
Purposes that are not charitable
-
Profit making for individuals
- If profit made, must be ploughed back
-
Political pursuits
- Must not espouse views of particular party
-
Or seek to change law
- National Anti-Vivisection Society v IRC [1948]
-
Acceptable if ancillary or incidental to main objects
-
Amnesty International not charitable
- McGovern v A-G [1982]