ICNL logo

The International Journal
of Not-for-Profit Law

Volume 4, Issue 4, June 2002

A publication of the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law

Table of Contents


The Legal Framework for Civil Society in East and Southeast Asia
Barnett F. Baron

A Flaw in Comparative Studies of the Tax Benefits for NGOs in Latin America
Antonio Itriago M. and Miguel
Itriago M

The Principle of Subsidiarity in Italy: It's Meaning as a "Horizontal" Principle and It's Recent Constitutional Recognition
Andrea Maltoni

A Synopsis of Law Reform for Iranian NGOs
Zahra (Sahar) Maranlou

Tax Treatment of NPOs in Macedonia
Prof. Dr. Vesna Pendovska

Competition and Abuse of Association Membership
Assoc. Prof. Ivo Telec


Working with the Non-Profit Sector in South Africa
Working with the Non-Profit Sector in Nigeria

By the Charities Aid Foundation / Allavida
Reviewed by Karla Simon

Legal and Organizational Practices in Nonprofit Management
By Pacquale Ferraro
Reviewed by Karla Simon

Promoting Legal and Institutional Frameworks for Corporate Social Responsibility in Peru
By Javier de Belaúnde L. de R., Beatriz Parodi L., and Delia Muñoz M.
Reviewed by ICNL Staff

Social Responsibility: 12 Case Studies from Chile
by Soledad Teixido, Reinalina Chavarri, and Andrea Castro
Reviewed by ICNL Staff

Case Notes

Asia Pacific:
Hong Kong

Newly Independent States: Russia

North Africa:

North America:
Canada | United States

Sub-Saharan Africa:

Western Europe:
United Kingdom

Country Reports

FATF | World Bank

Asia Pacific:
Regional | Australia | Indonesia | Japan | New Zealand

Central and Eastern Europe: Bosnia and Herzegovina | Czech Republic | Hungary | Lithuania | Macedonia | Slovakia

Latin America & The Caribbean: Chile | Peru

Middle East and North Africa: Kuwait

Newly Independent States: Armenia | Azerbaijan | Kyrgyzstan

North America:
Canada | United States

South Asia:
India | Pakistan

Sub-Saharan Africa:
Nigeria | South Africa | Tanzania

Western Europe:
Regional | Belgium | Germany | Italy | United Kingdom

- - - - - - - - - -

Editorial Board

Case Notes: Western Europe

United Kingdom

United Kingdom Case Updates, by Paul Bater *                        

The Church Schools Foundation Limited v. Customs and Excise , Court of Appeal, (2001), 20 November 2001

The Court of Appeal has reversed the decision of the High Court in the Church Schools Foundation (CSF) case (see IJNL Volume 3 Issue 2, 2001).  The court held that it was not possible to identify the supply for which the grants received by the charity were alleged to be consideration liable to Value Added Tax. Although CSF had improved the properties leased to the affiliated charity, the Church Schools Company (CSC), which had made the grants concerned, CSF also owned the properties and therefore no benefit was received by CSC; its use of the properties derived not from the grants but from the leases, which CSF had granted to it at a market rent.

Elizabeth Hunter, Martin Ward, Hilary Callin v. Leonard Cheshire Foundation [2001] EWHC Admin 48, High Court                                 

The claimants challenged a decision by a charity, the Leonard Cheshire Foundation (LCF), to close the care home in which the claimants had lived for over 17 years and to move them to alternative accommodation in smaller units in the surrounding area. The claimants argued that LCF exercised functions of a public nature so as to be a “public authority” within section 6 Human Rights Act 1998 and therefore owed the claimants a duty to comply with their right to respect for their home under Article 6 European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), and that the decision to close the home was a breach of that duty in going against their legitimate expectation that it would be their home for the rest of their lives.

The court held that:

R v. Dyke and Munro [2001] EWCA Crim 2184, Court of Appeal 

The two appellants in this case appealed against their conviction and sentence to imprisonment for theft following a trial in the Crown Court. In 1997 the second appellant became a trustee of a charity that raised money for people with leukaemia by street collections, and in 1998 the first appellant was appointed a trustee. The prosecution alleged that a significant part of the money collected had not been paid into the charity’s bank account, and had been taken by the two appellants and a third man. The defence claimed that the appellants were incompetent but not dishonest and had not taken the money. In the Crown Court the judge had directed the jury that they did not need to establish who owned the money, it being sufficient in a case of theft to show that the property did not belong to those who were alleged to have taken it. On appeal, the Court of Appeal quashed the conviction on the grounds that, once money was placed in a collection box it belonged to the charity and any misappropriation of the funds was a theft from the charity and not from the donors, and since no application to amend the indictment had been made it was not possible for the court to substitute a conviction for an alternative offence.

Premji Devraj Varsani v. Jesani, High Court, LTL 13 September 2001 (unreported elsewhere)

Following a decision of the Court of Appeal (see Premji Devraj Varsani v. Jesani (1998) 2 WLR 255) to this effect, an application was made to the court under section 13 Charities Act 1993 for a cy pres scheme for the division of the assets of a Hindu religious charity whose members had divided into two groups after a rift on theological grounds. The High Court held that:

The court declined to order a sale of the existing temple or to adjudicate at this stage on the future name of each group, but ordered that the minority group be paid £ 250,000 out of the charity’s assets to fund the establishment of the minority group at a new temple.

War Memorial Hostel Committee of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland v. Commissioner of Valuation for Northern Ireland , Lands Tr (NI),  [2001] R.A. 166.

A charity established in Northern Ireland to provide accommodation for young people of the Presbyterian Church owned a hostel, which was used mainly as student accommodation, on which it claimed exemption from rates (a local tax on the ownership and occupation of real property) on the grounds that:

On appeal against a decision of the rating commissioner to refuse the claim, the Lands Tribunal held that:

However, since the activities and facilities provided by the common room to the students were similar to those provided by a church hall, exemption was available for the common room only.

  *Paul Bater is Senior Research Associate – International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation. 


Copyright © 2012 The International Center for Not-for-Profit Law (ICNL)
ISSN: 1556-5157