header-logo header-logo

Beyond the looking-glass: discriminating charities

10 December 2020 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7914 / Categories: Features , Charities , Housing , Local government
printer mail-detail
34190
R (on the application of Z) v Hackney London Borough Council: Nicholas Dobson navigates the Supreme Court’s path through a hall of mirrors
  • A housing charity did not unlawfully discriminate when in pursuance of its charitable objects it allocated all its properties to members of the Orthodox Jewish community.

In his 1872 masterpiece, Oxford Christ Church mathematics lecturer Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, (otherwise known as Lewis Carroll) introduced us to Tweedledum and Tweedledee. After Alice had regaled them by reciting an ‘old song’, they gave her a short philosophical disquisition:

‘I know what you’re thinking about,’ said Tweedledum: ‘but it isn’t so, nohow.’

‘Contrariwise,’ continued Tweedledee, ‘if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn’t, it ain’t. That’s logic.’

Such clarity of concept came to mind at times when navigating some of the arguments in a 16 October 2020 Supreme Court decision on anti-discrimination law and charities. This was R (on the application of Z and another) v Hackney

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll