I think DvT is to do with there not really being a public benefit
requirement for trusts for the relief of poverty and Oppenheim is to
show that there really,really is one for education trusts, No?
Anyway,yea basically Ireland is more liberal than many other common
law jurisdictions (Tort etc).As regards charitable trusts,in Eng
anyway, the Ct will take an objective view of what 'the ord person'
would think of as charitable, but in Ireland,under cases such as
ReWorth Library the testator's/settlor's view is a factor to be
considered ,for eg RE CRANSTON it was held that a gift to a vegetarian
society would be classified as being charitable as the testaor had
been heavily involved in such movements...
That's what I make of it.
On Oct 5, 5:19 pm, billybob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anybody familiar with the Subjective/Objective divide in relation to
> MacNaughtons 4th category of Charitable Trusts??
>
> Cases =Dingle v Turner, ReCranston, Oppenheim.
>
> Which approach do the courts take in Ireland?? Thanks
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FE-1
Study Group" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.ie/group/FE-1-Study-Group?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
