Re Hetherington, decd

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1989
Year1989
CourtChancery Division
[CHANCERY DIVISION] In re HETHERINGTON, DECD. [1987 No. H. 7294] 1989 Jan. 18, 19, 20; 23 Sir Nicolas Browne-Wilkinson V.-C.

Charity - Religion - Masses - Gift for saying of Masses for repose of souls of testatrix and her family - Whether public benefit - Whether charitable

The testatrix left a specific legacy of £2,000 to the Roman Catholic Church Bishop of Westminster and her residuary estate to the Roman Catholic Church of St. Edward's, Golders Green, for Masses to be said for the repose of souls.

On a summons to determine whether the legacies were valid charitable trusts:—

Held, that gifts for the saying of Masses, a religious purpose, were prima facie charitable; that there was a sufficient element of public benefit as long as all the Masses were said in public and the moneys were used for the provision of stipends for the priests who said the Masses, so relieving the church funds pro tanto; and that, accordingly, since the gifts could be construed as gifts for the saying of Masses only in public as opposed to privately and the evidence was that the moneys would be used for the payment of clerical stipends, both gifts were valid charitable trusts for the saying of Masses in public (post pp. 1097A–B, 1100E, G, 1101B–E).

In re White [1893] 2 Ch. 41; In re Caus [1934] Ch. 162 and In re Banfield, decd. [1968] 1 W.L.R. 846 applied.

Bourne v. Keane [1919] A.C. 815, H.L.(E.) and Gilmour v. Coats [1949] A.C. 426 (H.L.(E.) distinguished

The following cases are referred to in the judgment:

Ashville Investments Ltd. v. Elmer Contractors Ltd. [1988] 3 W.L.R. 867; [1988] 2 All E.R. 577, C.A.

Baker v. The Queen [1975] A.C. 774; [1975] 3 W.L.R. 113; [1975] 3 All E.R. 55, P.C.

Banfield, decd., In re [1968] 1 W.L.R. 846; [1968] 2 All E.R. 276

Barrs v. Bethell [1982] Ch. 294; [1981] 3 W.L.R. 874; [1982] 1 All E.R. 106

Caus, In re [1934] Ch. 162

Egan, In re [1918] 2 Ch. 350, C.A.; sub nom. Bourne v. Keane [1919] A.C. 815, H.L.(E)

Gilmour v. Coats [1949] A.C. 426; [1949] 1 All E.R. 848, H.L.(E.)

Heath v. Chapman (1854) 2 Drew. 417

Hoare v. Hoare (1886) 56 L.T. 147

National Antivivisection Society v. Inland Revenue Commissioners [1948] A.C. 31; [1947] 2 All E.R. 217, H.L.(E.)

West v. Shuttleworth (1835) 2 My. & K. 684

White, In re [1893] 2 Ch. 41 Yeap Cheah Neo v. Ong Cheng Neo (1875) L.R. 6 P.C. 381

The following additional cases were cited in argument:

Barclay, In re [1929] 2 Ch. 173

Close v. Steel Co. of Wales Ltd. [1962] A.C. 367; [1961] 3 W.L.R. 319; [1961] 2 All E.R. 953, H.L.(E.)

Coats' Trusts, In re [1948] Ch. 1; [1947] 2 All E.R. 422

Cocks v. Manners (1871) L.R. 12 Eq. 574

Delany, In re [1902] 2 Ch. 642

F.A. & A.B. Ltd. v. Lupton [1972] A.C. 634; [1971] 3 W.L.R. 670; [1971] 3 All E.R. 948, H.L.(E.)

Guaranty Trust Co. of New York v. Hannay & Co. [1918] 2 K.B. 623

Hallisy, In re (1932) 4 D.L.R. 516

King, In re [1923] 1 Ch. 243

Watson, decd., In re [1973] 1 W.L.R. 1472; [1973] 3 All E.R. 678

ORIGINATING SUMMONS

By an originating summons dated 12 November 1987 the plaintiff, John William Barratt Gibbs, the sole administrator of the estate of Margaret Josephine Hetherington, deceased, sought relief against the first defendant, Deirdre McDonnell, a person interested on the intestacy of the deceased, and the Attorney-General. The relief sought was determination of the court on the questions (1) whether upon the true construction of the will of the deceased and in the events which had happened the gift of £2,000 to “the Roman Catholic Church Bishop of Westminster for Masses for the repose of the souls of my husband and my parents and my sisters and also myself when I die” constituted (a) an absolute immediate gift to the bishop, either personally or by virtue of his office, coupled with a wish or direction not amounting to a trust or condition, or (b) a gift subject to a valid condition, or (c) a gift imposing a valid charitable trust, or (d) a gift void as contrary to public policy or otherwise; (2) whether the gift to the Catholic Enquiry Centre of Hampstead was a valid and effective charitable gift; (3) whether the gift of £200 “to Father Morley of the Roman Catholic Church Golders Green N.W.11. to help with repair of his church” was a valid and effective charitable gift; (4) whether and to what extent the residuary gift: “Whatever is left over of my estate is to be given to the Roman Catholic Church St. Edwards Golders Green for Masses for my soul” constituted: (a) an absolute immediate gift to the church coupled with a wish or direction not amounting to a trust or condition, or (b) a gift subject to a valid condition, or (c) a gift imposing a valid charitable trust, or (d) a gift void as contrary to public policy or otherwise; (5) whether the will disclosed a general charitable intent; and (6) an order appointing the first defendant to represent all persons interested on the death wholly or partially intestate of the deceased.

The facts are stated in the judgment.

J.H.G. Sunnucks for the plaintiff.

John Ross Martyn for the first defendant.

Peter Crampin for the Attorney-General.

SIR NICOLAS BROWNE-WILKINSON V.-C. This case raises a question on the will of Mrs. Hetherington dated 17 November 1980 which she made in her own hand. The testatrix was a devout Roman Catholic. At the date of her will she worshipped regularly at a church, St. Edward's, Golders Green. The two gifts in the will which are relevant are as follows:

“I wish to leave £2,000 to the Roman Catholic Church Bishop of Westminster for Masses for the repose of the souls of my husband and my parents and my sisters and also myself when I die.”

The other gift is:

“Whatever is left over of my estate is to be given to the Roman Catholic Church, St. Edward's, Golders Green, for Masses for my soul.”

The question which arises is whether or not those gifts being gifts for the saying of Masses establish valid charitable trusts.

The first defendant is one of the next of kin of the testatrix. Her own personal wish is that the gifts contained in those trusts should take effect. However, she has been joined as a representative defendant and represented by Mr. Ross-Martyn who has put forward all the arguments in favour of the trusts failing.

The nature of the Mass. in the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church was summarised by Luxmoore J. in In re Caus [1934] Ch. 162, 167:

“According to the doctrines of the Roman Catholic church the Mass is a true and real sacrifice offered to God by the priest, not in his own person only, but in the name of the church whose minister he is. Every Mass. on whatever occasion used, is offered to God in the name of the church, to propitiate His anger, to return thanks for His benefits, and to bring down His blessings upon the whole world. Some portions of the Mass. are invariable and some are variable. Amongst those invariable ‘are an offering of the Host by the priest for his own sins and for all present, and also for all faithful Christians both living and dead, and the sacrifice is offered for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
54 cases
  • R (Kadhim) v Brent London Borough Council Housing Benefit Review Board
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 20 December 2000
    ...argument in earlier authority (Cf paragraph 31 above); but the proposition was stated much more generally. Second, in Re Hetherington [1990] Ch 1 Browne-Wilkinson VC concluded that he was not bound to hold that trusts for masses for the dead are charitable trusts, even though in Bourne v Ke......
  • Koh Lau Keow v AG
    • Singapore
    • High Court (Singapore)
    • 19 August 2013
    ...Davis, Re [1923] 1 Ch 225 (folld) Endacott, Re [1960] Ch 232 (folld) Gilmour v Coats [1949] AC 426 (distd) Hetherington, deceased, Re [1990] Ch 1 (folld) IRC v Baddeley [1955] AC 572 (folld) Keren Kayemeth Le Jisroel Ltd v CIR [1931] 2 KB 465 (folld) Morice v The Bishop of Durham (1804) 9 V......
  • Shell v Persons Unknown
    • United Kingdom
    • Queen's Bench Division
    • 20 May 2022
    ...that section 12(3) applied) I do not consider that it is authority that section 12(3) applies in the circumstances of the present case: Re Hetherington [1990] Ch 1 per Sir Nicholas Lord Browne Wilkinson VC at 10, R (Khadim) v Brent London Borough Council Housing Benefit Review Board [2001......
  • Nicholas Courtauld Rayner v The Lord Chancellor
    • United Kingdom
    • Chancery Division
    • 2 December 2013
    ...in a narrower compass. Those statements were, in our respectful view, properly synthesized by Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson V-C in In re Hetherington, deed [1990] Ch 1. 36. Third, we have to remember that it is the reasons that bind, and not the decision. Any formulation of a rule of preced......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 books & journal articles
  • PRE-COMMENCEMENT DISCOVERY AND THE ODEX LITIGATION: COPYRIGHT VERSUS CONFIDENTIALITY OR IS IT PRIVACY?
    • Singapore
    • Singapore Academy of Law Journal No. 2008, December 2008
    • 1 December 2008
    ...Interest in the Law of Copyright in Singapore?” (2003) Singapore Journal of Legal Studies at pp 519—556. 18 W v Egdell [1989] 2 WLR 689, [1990] Ch 1. 19 X v Y [1988] 2 All ER 648. 20 Recall the SARS epidemic in Singapore and the need for urgent public contact tracing. 21 Campbell v MGN Ltd ......
  • Minerals and Timber
    • United Kingdom
    • Wildy Simmonds & Hill The Law of the Manor - 2nd Edition Part III. Rights
    • 29 August 2012
    ...are rights of common they have now been lost unless registered. 6 See Rackham, O, Trees and Woodlands in the British Landscape (JM Ltd, 1990) Ch 1. 7 (1823) 1 B&C 375, 107 ER 139. Furze, otherwise known as gorse or whin, grows over most of England and used to be valued both as fuel and as f......
  • Religious charitable status and public benefit in Australia.
    • Australia
    • Melbourne University Law Review Vol. 35 No. 3, December 2011
    • 1 December 2011
    ...argument that public benefit could be taken for granted in relation to the first three heads of charitable purpose. (39) Re Hetherington [1990] 1 Ch 1, 12 (Browne-Wilkinson V-C). See also Gilmour v Coats [1949] AC (40) Extension of Charitable Purpose Act 2004 (Cth) s 5(1)(b). (41) See Tax L......
  • Sir Robert Garran: Medio Tutissimus Ibis
    • United Kingdom
    • Federal Law Review No. 46-1, March 2018
    • 1 March 2018
    ...Dictionary of Biography (Melbourne University Press, 1988) vol 11, 347; L F Crisp, Federation Fathers (Melbourne University Press, 1990) ch 1. 42 Garran, ‘The Federation Movement and the Founding of the Commonwealth’, above n 20, 440. 43 Ibid. 44 Quick and Garran, above n 20, 158–9. 45 Aust......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT