“While we began looking at LexisNexis products primarily for cost saving, it quickly became more about customer service, ease of onboarding, ongoing training and breadth of resources available.”
Co-OpAccess all documents on Advancement of education
The IFTCC v Charity Commission [2025] UKFTT 449 (GRC) What are the practical implications of this case? Organisations formed, even in part, to bring about changes to the law or government policy will not secure charitable status. More precisely, where an organisation claims the advancement of education as its charitable aim, conduct that seeks to persuade individuals to adopt the body’s doctrine makes recognition less likely. This judgment also underscores that a court may look beyond stated objects to an organisation’s day-to-day operations and internal policies. The FTT found that the registration of other, apparently similar organisations was irrelevant to this appeal. Arguments based on comparators will not be entertained; each matter depends on its own facts. What was the background? By the Charities Act 2011 (CA 2011), an entity qualifies as a charity only if it is established solely for charitable purposes and serves the public benefit...
Unless an institution is set up solely for charitable purposes, it cannot be a charity. Statute (the Charities Act 2011 (CA 2011)) provides guidance: for the law of England and Wales, a charitable purpose is a purpose that falls within section 3(1), and is for the public benefit (see section 4). Accordingly, the definition adopts a two-limbed approach; the first limb requires a proposed purpose to align with a defined list, and the second concerns public benefit. That list is far more substantial and encompassing than earlier lists, and is considerably broader and more inclusive than those that preceded it...