Charity trustees

Charity trustees

No charity can function without trustees. Their appointment has to follow strict rules and there are restrictions on who may be trustees. They have very specific duties and obligations as well as powers.

Incorporation of charity trustees

Where a charity is established as a trust, the fact that its properties, investments and contracts are vested in the individual trustees means that all those assets have to be assigned or novated each time the composition of the body of trustees changes (eg on death, or retirement, or the appointment of a new trustee). One way to avoid this process is for the charity trustees to incorporate themselves as a body corporate under Part 12 of the Charities Act 2011. This allows the charity’s assets to be vested in a perpetual, corporate trustee, while individual trustees continue to be appointed and removed in the usual way and continue to administer the charity with the same powers and duties as before.

Incorporation of the trustees is not the same as incorporating the charity as a body corporate (usually by way of a company limited by guarantee). Under Part 12 of the Charities Act

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

TAKE A FREE TRIAL

Latest Private Client News

Charity Commission publishes first annual sector risk assessment highlighting financial pressures

The Charity Commission has published its first Charity Sector Risk Assessment, drawing on 2023 Annual Return data and 2023–24 casework. The report identifies financial resilience as a key concern, noting that 22.5% of charities reported operating deficits in 2023, an increase from 20% in 2022. It outlines multiple pressures affecting charities, including increased service demand and rising staff costs, and highlights research indicating that the proportion of people receiving food, medical, or financial support from charities has tripled over the past five years.

Private Client weekly highlights—25 September 2025

This week’s edition of Private Client highlights includes: (1) analysis of British Camelids Ltd v Brooke Hospital for Animals which considers whether a gift in a Will fails if the beneficiary charity ceases to exist; (2) Darlington Borough Council v AW (by her litigation friend, the Official Solicitor), in which the Court of Protection held that unwise decisions are not equivalent to a lack of capacity and emphasised the need to respect P’s autonomy; (3) Masters v HMRC, where an expat’s withdrawals from their SIPP was held exempt from UK tax under the UK-Portugal Double Tax Convention; (4) HMRC confirms huge increase in individuals under criminal investigation; (5) VP Evans (as executrix of HB Evans, deceased) & Ors v HMRC, a FTT rules decision on disclosure of documents which notes the use of AI in producing decision; (6) CIOT’s responses to draft legislation for Finance Bill 2025–26 on IHT and pensions; and (7) BX v T Ltd (as trustee of the W Trust, in which the Guernsey Court of Appeal sets a high bar for disclosure of trust information to non-beneficiaries.

CIOT submits technical proposals on Draft Finance Bill IHT pension changes

The Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) has submitted detailed policy proposals and technical questions to HMRC regarding the Draft Finance Bill 2025-26 legislation on inheritance tax (IHT) and pensions. The submission, dated 19 September 2025, outlines eight specific proposals addressing Personal Representatives' liability for IHT on pension funds, including recommendations for a 50% pension fund retention mechanism and amendments to the legisaltion as regards discharge certificates. CIOT also raised 20 technical questions.

Llamas, legacies, and legalities—does a gift in a Will fail if the charity ceases to exist? (British Camelids Ltd v Brooke Hospital for Animals and others)

Private Client analysis: An animal loving conservationist, Candia Midworth, who kept llamas at her farm in Surrey, left her £1.9m estate to be divided equally between several animal charities. By the time of her death on 8 April 2022, a few of the charities had been transferred to their successors or ceased to exist entirely. The claimants, British Camelids Ltd, sought to split the estate 50/50 between themselves and the fourth defendants as the only two remaining charities that existed at the time of Mrs Midworth’s death. Each of the first, second and third defendants maintained that they were the successors of the respective charities identified in the Will and should therefore still benefit from the gifts. The court held that a gift should not necessarily fail on the original named entity ceasing to exist if the broad charitable purpose of the gifts continues. The claimant and all defendants were entitled to an equal share of the residuary estate. Interestingly, the court further concluded that despite the fifth defendant ceasing to exist entirely, their respective share of the estate should be divided among some of the defendants who have broadly similar charitable purposes. Written by Lauren Gale, associate at Gardner Leader LLP.