header-logo header-logo

27 September 2018 / Bethan Walsh
Issue: 7810 / Categories: Features , Charities
printer mail-detail

A higher duty of care?

Bethan Walsh examines the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation ruling & its implications for charitable companies

  • Does a member of a charitable company have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of that charity?

On 6 July 2018, the much-anticipated decision of the Court of Appeal confirmed the High Court’s decision that a member of the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (UK) (CIFF), a charitable company limited by guarantee, had fiduciary duties to act in the best interests of the charity, a duty that is also imposed on members of a charitable incorporated organisation (CIO). The case before the Court of Appeal was Lehtimäki v Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (UK) and others [2018] EWCA Civ 1605, [2018] All ER (D) 52 (Aug).

The Court of Appeal was asked to rule on two key areas: first, whether or not a member of a charitable company has a duty to act in the best interests of that charity; and second, whether such a member could be required to act under the direction of the court. This article

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

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll