Remarriageable Widows
| Author | A. I. Ogus |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1968.tb01195.x |
| Date | 01 May 1968 |
| Published date | 01 May 1968 |
MAY
1968
NOTES
OF
CASES
aa9
them with amenities, such as better furnishings, redecoration and
food, telephones, television sets, etc.lc None of the members of the
court had any doubt that the provision of such amenities was a
charitable purpose:
''
There is nothing unlawful in making pro-
vision for these amenities for paying patients in that way.
In
view of the heavy payments which paying patients have to make,
they may well benefit from any provision which may be made for
their comfort and welfare in the hospital."
"
I
do
not
think
that it is at all irrational
on
the part of this testatrix; she may
well have thought
it
worthy of reward that people should pay
their own way."
l'
Preoccupation with construction and the meritoriousness of
paying patients seems to have led to an important question being
overlooked. Granted that a
gift
for the general purposes of a volun-
tary hospital
is
charitable (even
if,
as in the
Le
Cras
case, it can
only directly benefit paying patients), is the provision
of
every
kind of amenity for patients (whether paying ones
or
not)
to
be
treated as subject to the privileges of charity
?
So
long as charitable
status entails tax relief, the endowment of luxury must surely have
some limit, even for the deserving well-to-do sick.
In
Re
Cole,18
it was held by the majority of the Court of Appeal
that, even if a gift of income for the general purposes of a county
council children's home could be regarded as charitable, a gift
for the
"
general benefit
yy
and
''
general welfare
yy
of the children
in it from time to time could not, since the income could be applied
in ways not charitable. A well known dictum of Romer
L.J.
in
that case contrasts starkly with the above citations
from
Danck-
werts and Russell
L.JJ.:
''
I
cannot regard the provision of tele-
vision sets, etc., for the benefit of such persons as juvenile
delinquents and refractory children
in
Southdown
House
as coming
within any conception of charity which is to be found in the
preamble.
If
it
were, then
I
suppose a
gift
to provide the inmates
of a Borstal institution with amenities would be charitable, which
would appear
to
me
to
be an impossible contention.') Should
charitable objects be measured by desert,
or
need
?
J.
W.
HARRI~.
REMARRIAGEABLE
WIDOWS
A
PROBLEM
which has recently been considered in the courts
is
the
extent to which awards under the Fatal Accidents Acts should be
15
16
17
1H
ID
[1967]
3
All
E.R.
285
at p.
290,
per
Danckwertg
L.J.
Freah
evidence
wan
adduced before
the
Court
of
Appeal listmiing the amenities which might be
provided
for
pa ing patients.
[lo671
3
All
dR.
285 at
p.
290,
per
Danckwerts
L.J.;
the
last sentence
appears
to
contain a
non
sequitur.
[1967]
3
All
E.R.
285
at
p.
291,
per
Russell
L.J.
[1958]
Ch.
877.
per
Romer
L.J.
at
pp.
887-888;
per
Ormerod
L.J.
at
p.
890.
[1958]
Ch.
877
at
p.
888.
To continue reading
Request your trial