## 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

1. 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.
2. Whether political purposes could meet the public benefit requirement necessary for charitable status.
3. 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.