Charity Cases

the “public” must be the community and not persons with family or blood relationships. In the case Re Compton the trust was not a valid charitable trust because the beneficiaries were defined by a personal relationship with the testatrix.

the association had two purposes, one charitable and other not. If the non-charitable purpose cannot be regarded as incidental to the other, the association cannot be established for charitable purpose only.

Gifts to relieve poverty amongst employees of a company were charitable.

providing housing for the working class is not seen as charitable because the class of beneficiaries was not limited to those who in terms of the law of charity were poor.

a gift for the construction of a working men’s hostel is charitable.

An object that aims to promote increase of knowledge is not charitable unless combined with teaching or education.

training spiritualistic mediums is not held as educational and is therefore not charitable.

a trust to provide facilities for football and other sports at schools and universities was held to be educational and charitable.

the study and dissemination (Verbreitung) of ethical principles has nothing to do with religion. It was held to be educational.

promoting good race relations and eliminating discrimination on racial groups is no longer political. It’s now a charitable purpose.

the trust failed because it wasn’t fully charitably but also political.

in this case the conjunctive language was used

in those cases where the amount of money which is gifted to non-charitable purposes can not be clarified, the whole gift fails.