Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

8 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back


CT's attract as special form of treatment by the law compared with other trusts, mainly tax privileges and exception from Beneficiary Principle.

Macnaghten Test

Laid down in Commissioners for Special Purposes of Income Tax v Pemsel - 4 Parts;

For the relief of poverty

For the advancement of education

For the advancement of religion

For other purposes beneficial to the community

Charities Act 2009

In current state of flux - Charities Bill 2014 and proposed 5th category of 'Human Rights'.

The Act will relieve AG of ensuring trusts valid.

Section 3 now puts Macnaghten test on statutory footing. Section 3(2) requires additional element of satisfying the public interest.

Relief of Poverty

Re Coulthust "something far short of, or far wider than destitution"

Re Gardom temp residence for "ladies of limited means"

North Deveon West Somerset Relief Fund gift for victims of flood

Re Sanders Will Trusts housing for working class was not charitable

Re Segleman Dec'd gifts to poorer members of family was charitable but critisized

Baddeley v IRC gift aimed at amusing poor people did not relieve poverty

Public Benefit; reduced almost to vanishing point

Re Compton usually PB not for beneficiaries defined by personal relationship, but for poverty ok

White v White providing apprenticeships for poorer relations was ok

Dingle v Turner "poor members/poor employees" was a natural development of this

Re Segleman Dec'd provided for poorer relations for 21 years upheld

Advancement of Education

Definition of education has been broadened in recent years.

Re Shaw conveyance of knowledge not enough (researching alphabet)

Re Shaw's Will Trusts gift for bringing artistic masterpieces within the reach of the people of Ireland of all classes was upheld - "arts and graces of life"

Re Hopkins Will Trust academic research that would end up in the public domain was ok

Re Worth Library incl gifts for the est. of theatres, art galleries, museums and the promotion of literature and music

Magee v AG education requires something that contributes to the betterment of people.

IRC v McMullen trust for providing PE in schools and colleges charitable

Geologists Assocation v IRC gifts for professional organisation may be educational in the objects are in reality educational and not for the promotion of a profession.

Public Benefit;

Verge v Somerville a trust will only be charitable if it is for the betterment of the community or an appreciable class of the community

Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities education for current and former employees children failed as did not constitute public

Re Worth Library 3 office holders were the intended beneficiaries. Struck down.

Re Koettgen's Will Trusts "founders kin" gifts to educational institutes ok

Advancement of Religion

Religion is not defined and a broad approach has been taken

Keren Kayemeth v IRC "the promotion of spiritual teaching in a wide sense"

Copinger v Crehane gift to a particular religion was allowed

Scott v Brownrigg gift for missionary purposes was too vague

Re Byrne gift to Jesuits not charitable per se as not all of their activities were charitable

Gibson v Rep Church Body gifts to ecclesiastical office holders presumed charitable

Celebration of Masses

Under s45 of the 1961 Act masses were deemed charitable. This has continued in the 2009 Act, although with regulation as to the selling of pre-signed mass cards.

AG v Delaney must be held in public to be deemed charitable.

O'Hanlon v Logue Irish CoA clarified that gifts fo the celebration of masses as 'gifts to God' are charitable and meet the PB requirement.

Gilmour v Coats gifts to Carmelites was not charitable as no public benefit.

Other Purposes Beneficial to the Community

Catch-all category and very difficult to define.

Incorp Council for Law Reporting v AG test should be that if it is prima facie to the benefit of the community then it should be charitable.

National Anti-Vivisection potential detriment, so no

Re Cranston founder must believe trust to be one of public benefit.

Re Worth Library subjective approach in Ireland; that an appreciable amount of people should consider it charitable

Trusts for a Political Purpose are not charitable, and a generally defined as when a trust requires a change in the law.

Public Benefit;

Williams v IRC stricter test here

National Tourism Devel. Auth. v Coughlan a trust for shares in 3 golf courses - preserving natural environment and promoting tourism. Not recognised.