Its utilisation by trust lawyers as a
replacement for the word ‘charitable’ was made necessary because the effect of
the law of charities is that the word ‘charitable’ in law bears little
resemblance to the concept it bears in ordinary English. It might perhaps have
promoted clarity for lawyers to have used the word ‘eleemosynary’ to refer to
the technical sense of the concept and to have left the word ‘charitable’ with
its ordinary meaning, but it is too late now to rescue the language from this
misfortune.”
Mr. Justice Perram, The Hunger Project
Australia v Commissioner of Taxation [2013] Corrections to the blogosphere, the consensus, and the world
Friday, September 27, 2013
Laughter in the court
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment