![]() |
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
Edited Legal Collections Data |
Book Title: Modernising Charity Law
Editor(s): McGregor-Lowndes, Myles; O’Halloran, Kerry
Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing
ISBN (hard cover): 9781849802505
Section: Chapter 2
Section Title: England and Wales: Pemsel Plus
Author(s): Driscoll, Lindsay
Number of pages: 26
Extract:
2. England and Wales: Pemsel plus
Lindsay Driscoll
INTRODUCTION HISTORY
There is a long history of attempts at reform of charity law and proposals
for a statutory definition in England and Wales. As far back as 1952 the
Nathan Committee recommended a statutory definition of charity based
on the Pemsel categories which preserved the existing case law1 but the
legislation that followed, the Charities Act 1960, which introduced charity
registration, omitted this recommendation. The next major report on
charity law was the Goodman Committee Report2 of 1976, which recom-
mended an updated list of the objects contained in the 1601 Preamble,
but no action was taken on this. The Charities Act 1992, which followed
the White Paper Charities: a Framework for the Future, introduced major
reforms of charity law, mainly with regard to the regulation and account-
ability of charities, but again omitted any reference to definition. In each
case there was a reluctance on the part of government to open the flood-
gates of debate on problem cases within existing charitable purposes and
calls for new ones from a wide range of interest groups.
Over fifty years after the first recommendation, the statutory definition
finally reached the statute book in 2006 but in all the debates and press
coverage this has been totally overshadowed by discussion of the new
emphasis on public benefit, particularly how this will affect fee-charging
charitable schools and religious charities. It is the public benefit aspect
rather than any extension of charitable purposes which ...
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/ELECD/2010/672.html