Charities Attempted Question
Edmond died recently. According to his will, the residue of his estate is to be held in trust as follows:
(a) To build a new place of worship for the Disciples of Ursa Major;
(b) To provide grants to circuses those do not use performing animals in their shows;
(c) To encourage governments everywhere to pursue policies that foster the ethical treatment of
animals. Felicity and Gilbert have been appointed as the executors of Edmond’s estate and the
trustees of his will trusts.
They seek your advice concerning the validity of those trusts. The Disciples of Ursa Major are people
who worship bears. They have just built a new temple near Paddington Station and have no desire to
build another facility.
Advise Felicity and Gilbert.
The Question is regarding Charities. It has to be seen whether those are charitable trust which have
been created by Edmond as he lift his will.
The one who enforces charitable trusts are the Attorney General in the name of the Crown in which they
are regulated and overseen by the Charity Commission, which plays a predominant role in supervision
and regulation of Charities.
Section 1(1) (a) of the Charities Act 2011 defines a ‘charity as one which is established for certain
purposes only’.
Charities trusts are said to be for the benefit of the public whereas private trust are for the benefit of
certain individuals only.
In order, for these scenarios to have a valid charitable purpose, it can be seen that it must satisfy that
the money given must be for a charitable purposes, which can be seen under 4 sources, in four criteria,
laid in case of Commissioners for Special purpose, of Income Tax v Pemsel Heads or S3 of the Charities
Act 2011.
Secondly, the charity itself must satisfy the public benefit requirement as illustrated in Independent
School Council v The Charity Commission (2012).
On advising, the executors of Edmond will the first scenario is to build a new place of worship for the
Disciples of Usra Major. On facts they don’t have desire to build another faculty.
Edmond died recently. According to his will, the residue of his estate is to be held in trust as follows:
(a) To build a new place of worship for the Disciples of Ursa Major;
(b) To provide grants to circuses those do not use performing animals in their shows;
(c) To encourage governments everywhere to pursue policies that foster the ethical treatment of
animals. Felicity and Gilbert have been appointed as the executors of Edmond’s estate and the
trustees of his will trusts.
They seek your advice concerning the validity of those trusts. The Disciples of Ursa Major are people
who worship bears. They have just built a new temple near Paddington Station and have no desire to
build another facility.
Advise Felicity and Gilbert.
The Question is regarding Charities. It has to be seen whether those are charitable trust which have
been created by Edmond as he lift his will.
The one who enforces charitable trusts are the Attorney General in the name of the Crown in which they
are regulated and overseen by the Charity Commission, which plays a predominant role in supervision
and regulation of Charities.
Section 1(1) (a) of the Charities Act 2011 defines a ‘charity as one which is established for certain
purposes only’.
Charities trusts are said to be for the benefit of the public whereas private trust are for the benefit of
certain individuals only.
In order, for these scenarios to have a valid charitable purpose, it can be seen that it must satisfy that
the money given must be for a charitable purposes, which can be seen under 4 sources, in four criteria,
laid in case of Commissioners for Special purpose, of Income Tax v Pemsel Heads or S3 of the Charities
Act 2011.
Secondly, the charity itself must satisfy the public benefit requirement as illustrated in Independent
School Council v The Charity Commission (2012).
On advising, the executors of Edmond will the first scenario is to build a new place of worship for the
Disciples of Usra Major. On facts they don’t have desire to build another faculty.
