[1972] AC 601 (HL). A trust to benefit a company's poorer employees was held to be charitable (see CharitableTrust), despite the strong, but much criticised, message of OppenheimVTobaccoSecuritiesTrustCo1951. Oppenheim is generally taken to have decided (at least for educational trusts) that a PublicPurposeTrust can not exist where there is a `personal nexus' between the donor and the beneficiaries.
Unfortunately -- so far as clarity of the law is concerned -- the House decided that this trust was valid because it was for the relief of poverty, and such a trust is not subject to the same test for public benefit. So remarks that Oppenheim should not be applied, although unanimous, have to be regarded as obiter_.
Law glossary index
©1994-2006 Kevin Boone, all rights reserved