|
Today the Upper Tribunal has ruled that certain parts of the Charity Commission’s guidance are wrong in law and will have to be re-written.
The key principles at issue were:
(a) that the opportunity to benefit [from a charity’s provision] should not be unreasonably restricted by ability to pay any fees charged; and
(b) that people in poverty must not be excluded from the opportunity to benefit.
The Tribunal has decided that both of these principles, as stated and applied by the Commission, are wrong and should be corrected.
In brief:
- There must be more than a de minimis or token benefit for the poor but the implication that a school must provide “reasonable” benefits is incorrect: “it is not a question of reasonableness. It is a question of the proper exercise of the trustees’ powers.” (paragraph 234)
- The Tribunal recognises that, whilst subsidised provision (i.e. bursaries) is important, there are many ways in which a particular charity might seek to broaden access. Crucially, it is for trustees to decide what to do and how best to do it.
- The Tribunal rejects the idea that a charity’s failure to abide by its guidance should lead to a removal of charitable status.
The decision is an affirmation of a trustee’s role in the running of a charity. It is entirely up to trustees how they decide to operate their charity subject only to acting within the range within which they may properly act.
The full text of the decision may be accessed here.
If you would like further information on this subject or have any comments please contact Arthur Byng Nelson or your usual contact at Pothecary Witham Weld.
14th October 2011
Pothecary Witham Weld
70 St George’s Square
London
SW1V 3RD |
|
Please Click Here to read our Charities Department Newsletter for July 2011. |
|
The Government’s 2011 Budget includes measures intended to encourage charitable giving and to support the voluntary sector.
The key changes put forward in the Budget are:
- From April 2012 if a person leaves 10% or more of their estate in their will to charity, the remaining chargeable sum in that person’s estate will be charged at 10% less than the usual rate. This means that instead of paying inheritance tax at the usual 40% the government will apply the lower rate of 36%.
- From April 2013 charities will be able to claim Gift Aid on up to £5,000 of small donations without the need for Gift Aid declaration forms for each donation. Note this is only available to charities that have been in existence for, and complied with the tax rules for, at least three years i.e. unbroken compliance from April 2010.
- From April 2012 there will be an increase in the Gift Aid benefit limit from £500 to £2,500 from April 2011 to enable charities to give ‘thank you’ gifts, to recognise the generosity of significant donors.
- Transport: from 6th April 2011 the passenger allowance of 5p per mile, which is already available to business, will be extended to volunteers. The Approved Mileage Allowance Payments rate, which applies equally to businesses and the voluntary sector, will rise from 40p per mile to 45p (25p after the first 10,000 miles).
- There will be a new system of online filing for Gift Aid donations. Expected in 2013.
- A consultation will be launched this year on a proposed scheme to encourage the giving of important works of art to the nation by offering donors a reduced tax bill.
The effect of a number of these measures is hard to ascertain immediately. Will we see larger proportions of estates passed to charities as a result of the 36 per cent inheritance tax offering? That said the Budget demonstrates a clear intent by the Government that is welcomed. In a few days’ time thousands of charities and voluntary organisations will benefit from the increase in the mileage allowance for drivers and passengers. Another important change for our clients will be the removal of the need for Gift Aid forms for small donations up to a total of £5,000. This will mean that money collected in tins, buckets or collection plates could now attract Gift Aid relief.
If you would like further information on this subject or have any comments please contact Arthur Byng Nelson or your usual contact at Pothecary Witham Weld.
31st March 2011
Pothecary Witham Weld
70 St George’s Square
London
SW1V 3RD |
|
|
Please click here to read our Education Law - Academies and Free Schools article. |
|
Monday, 07 March 2011 09:22 |
|
Age Discrimination and Retirement
The Government’s plan to abolish the default retirement age of 65 has been widely reported since the confirmation was received in January 2011. It had been expected that the default retirement age might have been increased, but its abolition may give cause for concern to employers about discrimination on the grounds of age and health and safety, capability matters. Under the current law, which is being phased out between March and October 2011, provided employers have complied with specific procedures, employees can be retired at 65, with minimum risk to the employer of an unfair dismissal and/or age discrimination claim. The Government’s draft regulations on the subject, The Employment Equality (Repeal of Retirement Age Provisions) Regulations 2011, were presented to Parliament on 16th February 2011. One provision of the draft regulations is that employers will not be able to give employees notices of retirement as they currently can, after 6th April 2011. Employers wishing to retire employees this year should seek advice about the applicable notice periods and procedures as soon as possible, to avoid the risk of claims later.
The Future of the Resolution of Workplace Disputes
In January 2011, the Government launched a consultation with the hope of improving the manner in which employment disputes are resolved. Some of the proposals concern cost cutting in the Tribunals Services, which could have a significant impact upon parties in proceedings, such as the suggestion of a Tribunal Judge sitting alone without the usual trade union and business panellist present to provide balance. However, the proposals that would have direct effect include an increase to two years of the qualifying period required to bring unfair dismissal cases (no change in the event of automatic unfair dismissal has so far been discussed) and the introduction of Tribunal fees and a costs system, with the intention of deterring claims. Employers generally agree that some form of process to prevent employees from bringing unmeritorious claims would be most welcome but trade unions and employees might be concerned about the consultation so far seeming to be employer biased. The proposals also include the further involvement of ACAS particularly at the outset and a greater use of mediation services. A fine for employers who lose tribunal cases is also being considered.
Should you have any questions please contact Maria Donnelly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 5 |
Legal Updates
