Facts
- The plaintiffs in McGovern v Attorney General sought to establish a trust to support human rights, including investigating abuses and disseminating related information.
- The trust’s purposes included the advocacy of changes to law or government policy, specifically relating to human rights.
- The Chancery Division, presided over by Slade J, examined whether these purposes could qualify as charitable under English law.
- The legal analysis centered on whether such purposes fell within the scope of the Charitable Uses Act 1601 and subsequent statutory developments.
Issues
- Whether a trust with purposes involving advocacy for changes in law or government policy, even for human rights, could be considered charitable under English law.
- Whether political purposes could meet the public benefit requirement necessary for charitable status.
- What distinguishes charitable from political purposes within the legal framework of trusts.
Decision
- The court held that the trust’s purposes were political because they involved advocating for changes in the law and government policy.
- It was determined that such political purposes do not qualify as charitable, as they are considered contentious and outside the scope of the Charitable Uses Act 1601.
- The support of human rights, when it involves political advocacy, was found not to constitute a charitable purpose.
- The court emphasized that purposes must be widely accepted as beneficial and not subject to public debate to satisfy the public benefit requirement for charities.
Legal Principles
- Charitable trusts must have purposes that fall within the spirit and intendment of the Charitable Uses Act 1601, later codified in the Charities Act 2011.
- The public benefit requirement demands that the trust serves the general public or a sufficient section of it.
- Political purposes—those involving advocacy for law or policy reform—are excluded from charitable status due to their contentious nature.
- The distinction between charitable and political purposes is essential for the regulation of trusts and their eligibility for legal recognition as charities.
Conclusion
McGovern v Attorney General [1982] Ch 321 confirms that trusts with political purposes, including advocacy for law or government policy change, do not qualify as charitable; such exclusion ensures charitable status is reserved for purposes universally accepted as beneficial.