100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 21 - 24 out of 77 pages.
Scottish Burial Reform and Cremation Society: a trust created for purpose of promoting cremation. Was analogous to the maintenance of graveyards and therefore charitable.2.4.1 Sport and recreational trusts?Promotion of fitness and good health may be charitable: IRC v McMullen(soccer in schools).LAW4170 Trusts21Aaron Chisholm
Recreational sport linked to education is a valid charitable purpose: Kearins– extra-curricular activities are part and parcel of the joys of Uni.However, purely recreational trusts are not charitable: Chester(trust for breeding of racing pigeons).oHorse show jumping is only recreational: Strathalbyn v Mayes.oAnglican Trusts Corporation: camp for Anglican girl scouts wholly recreational.2.4.2 Trusts for political purposes?There is no longer a blanket ban on charitable trusts for political purposes. Here the trust is arguably created to promote political discussion and therefore a valid charitable purpose: Aid/Watchcf UK position: McGovern.oAgitating for change will be valid charitable purpose because of Australia’s constitutional systemof representative government: Aid/Watchper Majority.oNB: Court in Aid/Watch decided this on the basis that AW was generating public debate about the delivery of aid overseas, which is one of the four heads (relief of poverty!).DID NOT extent to any political debate, but still open to extend.However, merely asserting one’s views (propaganda) will arguably not be for a charitable purpose: Aid/Watchper Kiefel J.oE.g. George Bernard Shaw’s trust, or a trust for holocaust deniers.oHer Honour (dissent) thought that Aid/Watch was just a pressure group shouting their opinions.Also consider whether the proposed trust is actually in the public benefit? What are the ends trying to be achieved and the means involved?oVicki’s example: a trust set up to advance Islam ok. A trust set up to lobby government to introduce Sharia law re marriages – probably still ok (debate re religion). If trust wanted to do this via a violent jihad (oh dear), then means probably not in public benefit.NB: Political trusts formerly thought to be invalid because, if the courts recognised people lobbying to change the law, this means that the court must admit that the law is wrong or bad (Dixon J, Royal NorthShore Hospital).oFurther, how would a judge decide what is in the public benefit? Consider the East-West Link.(3) Severance in mixed-purpose trustsArguably the charitable trust will fail because of the inclusion of [words] in [Clause #] which create a non-charitable purpose as well as a charitable purpose. At common law it is not possible to sever a charitable purpose from non-charitable: Chichester v Simpson.LAW4170 Trusts22Aaron Chisholm
However, because this trust was set up in Victoria, s 7MCharities Act 1978 (Vic)will allow the Court tosever [words] from [Clause #] and allow the trust clause to survive.