Advancement of education and charitable registration

Disclaimer

We do not guarantee the accuracy of this copy of the CRA website.

Scraped Page Content

Advancement of education and charitable registration

Guidance

Reference number

CG-030

Issued

November 27, 2020

This guidance replaces Policy commentary CPC-027, Publishing a magazine; Policy statements CPS-003, Daycare facilities, CPS-013, School councils; and Summary policies CSP-B05, Broadcasting, CSP-S08, Scholarships, CSP-E01, Advancement of education, CSP-I06, Provision of information, and CSP-S09, School associations.


General requirements for charitable registration


In addition to the requirements set out in this guidance, there are a number of other general requirements related to charitable registration. For more information, see Guidance CG-017, General requirements for charitable registration.

Guidance products can be updated. If you have comments or suggestions to improve the guidance, we would like to hear from you. To provide comments or obtain additional information, contact the Charities Directorate.

A. Introduction

  1. The Canada Revenue Agency's (CRA) Charities Directorate registers charities under the Income Tax Act, and ensures that registered charities continue to meet all associated legal and administrative requirements.
  2. In this guidance, unless otherwise stated:
    • charity includes all three types of registered charities: charitable organizations, public foundations, and private foundations
    • organization includes applicants for charitable registration, as well as registered charities
    • charity law refers to common law (case law or court decisions) and legislation (primarily the Income Tax Act)
  3. This guidance explains the CRA’s administrative policy on charity law, including the criteria an organization with purposes to advance education must meet to be eligible for registration.

B. General requirements for determining eligibility for charitable registration

Charitable purposes and activities

  1. The purposes (or “objects”) of an organization, found in its governing documents, are the goals or objectives it is created to achieve. (For more information, see Guidance CG-019, How to draft purposes for charitable registration.) The activities of an organization are the ways it furthers its purposes.Footnote 1
  2. To be registered as a charity, an organization’s purposes must be exclusively charitable. This means each purpose must satisfy the following three elements:
    • fit within one of four broad categories of charity:
      • relief of poverty
      • advancement of education
      • advancement of religion
      • other purposes beneficial to the community in a way the law regards as charitable
    • provide a public benefit
    • define the scope of the organization’s activities
  3. All of an organization’s resources must be devoted to activities that further its exclusively charitable purposes.Footnote 2

The public benefit requirement

  1. An organization’s purposes, and the activities that further them, must provide a public benefit. Public benefit is a two-part test. There must be a charitable benefit, and it must be provided to the public or a sufficient section of the public. In addition, any private benefit must be incidental.

Benefit

  1. The first part of the test requires that there is a recognizable, provable, and socially useful benefit.
  2. Purposes that advance education are presumed to provide a charitable benefit, unless the contrary is shown. This means that if the benefit is not clear, an organization may have to show that a charitable benefit will result.Footnote 3
  3. The CRA will examine a purpose and the activities that further it, to determine whether they meet the benefit requirement. The CRA first considers whether the purpose fits within the advancement of education category (by examining the content and process criteria explained in section D of this guidance). The CRA then considers any evidence that questions benefit. For example, operating a school to teach children appears to be a purpose that advances education, but if the school teaches illegal activities, it would not provide a charitable benefit.
  4. If the charitable benefit is questioned, an organization should provide evidence that is objective, reliable and relevant. The CRA will consider evidence of widespread acceptance by those who are knowledgeable about the subject.Footnote 4
  5. Purposes that are illegal or contrary to Canadian public policy do not provide a charitable benefit.Footnote 5

Public

  1. The second part of the test requires that the benefit is provided to the public or a sufficient section of the public.
  2. The section of the public that may benefit from purposes that advance education (the beneficiaries) must not be unjustifiably restricted. For information on acceptable restrictions on beneficiaries for purposes that advance education, see the Scholarship section of this guidance.
  3. Any private benefitFootnote 6 must be incidental to achieving the charitable purpose. This means it must be necessary, reasonable, and proportionate to the resulting public benefit.
  4. For more information about public benefit, see Policy statement CPS-024, Guidelines for registering a charity: Meeting the public benefit test.

Other requirements

  1. There are other requirements an organization must meet to be eligible for registration. For more information, see Guidance CG-017, General requirements for charitable registration.

C. Education under charity law

  1. Although the concept of education is broad, and all experience may be said to educate,Footnote 7 what qualifies as education under charity law is more limited. For the most part, it means to provide knowledge or develop abilities by deliberate teaching or training.Footnote 8
  2. Before 1999, Canadian courts had generally limited education to structured classroom teaching of traditional academic subjects, offered at schools, colleges and universities.Footnote 9 The courts also considered education to include the improvement of a useful branch of human knowledge through research.
  3. In 1999, the Supreme Court of Canada expanded educationFootnote 10 to include more informal training that would still “advance the knowledge or abilities of the recipients.”Footnote 11 But the Court was careful to limit its expansion,Footnote 12 recognizing that what is charitable should evolve incrementally to reflect changing times, by comparing new purposes to those the courts previously found to be charitable.Footnote 13
  4. Today, the advancement of education includes purposes that educate by:
    • training that provides knowledge or develops abilities
    • improving a useful branch of human knowledge through research
  5. This guidance addresses the first type of purposes, training that provides knowledge or develops abilities, and describes the criteria they must meet to be considered charitable. It also addresses special topics related to the advancement of education.Footnote 14
  6. The second type of purposes, improving a useful branch of human knowledge through research, is addressed in Policy statement CPS-029, Research as a charitable activity.

D. Purposes that educate through training

  1. Purposes that educate through training generally fall into two groups:
    1. purposes that educate through structured and targeted teaching or learning
    2. other purposes the courts have recognized to advance education

a. Purposes that educate through structured and targeted teaching or learning

  1. This group includes purposes that educate by formal or traditional classroom instruction, as well as less formal instruction, such as workshops, seminars, or self-study.Footnote 15ootnote 16

Examples


Examples of purposes that educate through structured and targeted teaching or learning:

  • To advance education by operating a private secondary school in (specify location).
  • To advance education by providing adult continuing education courses in business and accounting in the community of (specify location).
  • To advance education by providing a series of seminars on the history of Indigenous art in Canada to the general public.
  • To advance education by providing a series of workshops on basic car maintenance to the general public.
  • To advance education by providing distance learning programs in business and accounting to the public.
  • To advance education by providing general-interest art classes to the public.
  • To advance education by providing French language training to the public.
  • To advance education by providing courses, seminars and workshops on marketing, finance and bookkeeping to artists.

  1. To be charitable, the education advanced by these purposes must meet both the content and process criteria.

    The content criteria (education) include:

    1. (i) subject matter is useful and has educational value
    2. (ii) subject matter is not focused on promoting a point of view

    The process criteria (structured and targeted teaching or learning) include:

    1. (i) a structured formatFootnote 17
    2. (ii) a legitimate, targeted attempt to educateFootnote 18
    3. (iii) a teaching or learning componentFootnote 19

Content criteria (education)

(i) Subject matter is useful and has educational value
  1. To advance education, the subject matter must be usefulFootnote 20 and have educational value. This means it must provide a charitable benefit to the public.
  2. The educational value is often clear (for example, the study of history, economics, or geology).Footnote 21 However, a subject may be considered to have no educational value if it is too frivolous (such as the public exhibition of “junk"Footnote 22 ), improper or harmful (such as teaching how to pickpocketFootnote 23 or the benefits of smoking tobacco), or irrational (such as teaching that the earth is flatFootnote 24 ), or if it is illegal or contrary to Canadian public policy.Footnote 25
  3. The subject matter should be well-reasoned, meaning it should be factual or accurate, and fully and fairly analyzed. It may be theoretical or practical, speculative or technical, scientific or moral. It may include training in necessary life skills or practical subjects.Footnote 26
  4. Education in the charitable sense can provide knowledge or develop abilities for many reasons. It might do so for its own sake or as a means to an end.Footnote 27 For example, cooking may be studied for personal interest, or to advance a career as a chef.
  5. If the charitable benefit of a subject is questioned because the educational value is not clear, an organization may have to show it is present. In that case, an organization should provide evidence that is objective, reliable and relevant. The CRA will consider evidence of widespread acceptance by those who are knowledgeable about the subject.Footnote 28
(ii) Subject matter is not focused on promoting a point of view
  1. Simply promoting a particular point of view, or attempting to persuade, does not advance education under charity law.Footnote 29 Concerns arise when the subject matter contains information and opinion that is mostly biased or one-sided. This often occurs when a subject is controversial.Footnote 30 The subject matter should reflect a genuine attempt to provide knowledge or develop abilities.Footnote 31
  2. Although an organization may educate from a particular perspective, in that it may have a point of view on a subject, there needs to be a clear attempt to encourage awareness of different views. This allows recipients to make up their own minds.Footnote 32 For example, an educator may share an opinion or view while teaching a course, but the course material should be reasonably objective. It should reflect a genuine attempt to further students’ knowledge or abilities.
  3. However, a purpose to educate about a subject that presents a point of view which is generally accepted to be for the public benefit can advance education. For example, to educate that peace is preferable to war, or that smoking is harmful, is clearly for the public benefit, and can therefore be charitable. The benefit of peace is not controversial. But if the public benefit of the subject is not obvious, or it is not possible to determine it is for the public benefit, the purpose does not advance education, and is therefore not charitable.Footnote 33
  4. The CRA considers an activity to educate in the charitable sense if it represents a reasonably objective attempt to identify and disseminate accurate, well-reasoned information.Footnote 34 Indicators that an activity is promoting a point of view or attempting to persuade, rather than educate, may include:
    • providing incorrect or distorted information
    • leaving out information reasonably required to understand a subject
    • teaching a subject by providing materials that are not well-reasoned (factual or accurate, and fully and fairly analyzed)
    • providing opinion or one-sided argument
    • using language that is emotional, exaggerated or inflammatory

Process criteria (structured and targeted teaching or learning)

  1. The process criteriaFootnote 35 are about how the education is organized and presented. Although all criteria must be present, there is some overlap, or shared indicators, as listed below.
(i) Structured format
  1. To advance education, information or training must be provided in a structured manner.Footnote 36 Indicators of structure (all are required) consist of:
    • a clearly defined educational goal
    • a course outline or plan designed by qualified individuals
    • educational materials (a thorough body of knowledge) that can further the educational goal
  2. Structure may also require access to any tools, aids or equipment that may be required to enable students to learn (for example, a course in computer-assisted design may require access to a computer and specialized software).
  3. Education may be delivered in a variety of ways, and by way of a variety of media. For example, it may be delivered through recreational activities or in print or online format, as long as all criteria are present.
  4. The amount of structure required depends on the nature of the activity and the audience. For example, the structure required for a formal college course on horticulture will be different from the structure required for a one-day community workshop on backyard vegetable gardening. But both courses may further a purpose that advances education.
  5. To determine if there is enough structure, an organization should consider the educational materials, the audience, and the method of delivery. For example, by going hiking with a friend who happens to be a geologist, the hiker may, by chance, learn some local geology. On the other hand, going for an organized hike with the same friend, designed as a structured course or workshop on local geology, may be educational in the charitable sense. The geologist would intend to teach a subject (educational goal), and would develop a plan, a route, and educational materials to permit learning.
(ii) Legitimate, targeted attempt to educate
  1. There must be a legitimate, targeted attempt at educating. “Simply providing an opportunity for people to educate themselves, such as by making available materials with which this might be accomplished but need not be, is not enough.”Footnote 37
  2. A targeted attempt at educating also means the educational activities and associated materials are developed by qualified individual(s) and adapted to meet the learning needs of the students, taking into account age, education level, and learning style.
  3. The focus should be to educate. Activities that do not themselves educate, such as entertainment or recreational activities, may be acceptable if they are an incidental way of furthering the charitable purpose.
  4. Indicators of a legitimate, targeted attempt to educate (all are required) consist of:
    • educational materials prepared by qualified individual(s)
    • educational materials adapted to meet the learning needs of the students
    • a process to ensure audience engagement and participation, such as registration or attendance (registration is important, for example, in the case of self-study or distance learning)
  5. For example, creating a website that provides information on personal financial planning may be informative, but would not be a targeted attempt to educate. However, a course designed for teens on practical money skills, taught by a qualified teacher, that used similar information, might advance education. In the same way, a course for older adults on planning for retirement taught by a qualified instructor using similar information might advance education. Both courses would need to be designed to meet the needs of the students, and include teaching or learning.
(iii) Teaching or learning component
  1. To advance education, there must be a teaching or a learning component, or both.Footnote 38 Both teaching and learning require students to be actively engaged with the subject matter. There must be more than simply an opportunity for people to educate themselves.
  2. A teaching component requires that direct instruction is provided. Teaching could include, for example, lecturing, guiding, coaching, or leading discussions. A learning component requires that there be systems to assess learning. These systems could include testing, evaluation, or observing a demonstrated skill. For example, teaching a structured course in child care might advance education. Alternatively, if the course was designed by a qualified individual as a plan of self-study or distance learning, and students registered, were provided with materials, and were tested at the end, this might also advance education.
  3. Indicators of a teaching component (both are required) consist of:
    • instruction by an individual who is qualified
    • opportunity for students to obtain feedback, clarification, or answers to questions
  4. An indicator of a learning component consists of:
    • testing, evaluation, demonstration of skill, or other assessment of learning achievement

b. Purposes the courts have recognized to advance education

  1. The courts have recognized certain other purposes that advance education. Most are connected with and support formal or traditional classroom education. They include, for example, building and maintaining schools, providing scholarships to students, and providing books and equipment to students or schools. Some of these purposes are discussed below.

Scholarships, bursaries, prizes, and financial assistance for students

  1. The establishment and maintenance of a scholarship,Footnote 39 bursary,Footnote 40 or prizeFootnote 41 may be a charitable purpose under the advancement of education, if the funds advance education and provide a public benefit.
  2. Scholarships or bursaries cover expenses connected with training that provides knowledge or develops abilities, as well as research.Footnote 42 This includes tuition and associated expenses,Footnote 43 such as room and board, travel expenses, books and school supplies. Prizes reward, and therefore encourage, educational achievement.Footnote 44
Restrictions on beneficiary group
  1. To meet the public benefit test for purposes that advance education, the beneficiary group should be clearly identifiedFootnote 45 and not unjustifiably restricted.
  2. Generally, this means the beneficiary group must be sufficiently open in nature to show a true objective of benefiting the public.Footnote 46 However, it is acceptable if the opportunity to benefit is available to a large enough group, but by its nature it can only help one or a few at a time. For example, a single annual scholarship open to all students at a school or scholarships for students studying a particular subject at a school, is acceptable.Footnote 47
  3. Beneficiaries may be restricted by eligibility criteria (who is eligible to apply) or by selection criteria (how beneficiaries will be selected from among those who apply).
  4. The beneficiary group cannot be restricted to named individuals.Footnote 48 Also, the beneficiary group cannot be restricted to those who have a personal connection with one or more persons or entities,Footnote 49 such as a person’s relatives,Footnote 50 employees of a certain company,Footnote 51 or members of a certain organization,Footnote 52 regardless of the size of the group.Footnote 53
  5. However, beneficiaries may be restricted:
    • to employees or dependents of employees in an industry or profession as a whole,Footnote 54 because members of an industry or profession do not involve a personal connection
    • if the restriction has been recognized by the courts. Historically, this included students attending a particular school or university,Footnote 55 students sharing a common nationality or ethnic origin,Footnote 56 sex,Footnote 57 disability,Footnote 58 or religion,Footnote 59 or the inhabitants of a sizable geographic area, such as a town or village.Footnote 60 Some of these restrictions may no longer be acceptable, as discussed in paragraph 59, below
    • if the restriction is shown to be linked or relevant to achieving a charitable purposeFootnote 61 (for example, a scholarship to attend a school for the hearing impaired may be restricted to persons with hearing impairment)
    • if a personal connection has been identified as a preference, rather than an obligationFootnote 62 (for example, a scholarship offered to students of a school, with a statement that in selecting recipients, preference may be given to relatives of an individual or employees of a company)
  6. Organizations that seek to restrict beneficiaries must always ensure the restrictions are not illegal or contrary to Canadian public policy. Restrictions that may be contrary to public policy often involve a prohibited ground of discrimination specified in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms or federal or provincial human rights legislation. Restrictions the courts have sometimes found to be discriminatory, and therefore contrary to public policy, are generally based on notions of racism, sexism or religious superiority.Footnote 63 When considering restrictions on beneficiaries for purposes that advance education, recent court decisions in this area should be examined.
Selection of beneficiaries
  1. An organization should establish a process to select recipients. Scholarships and bursaries may be awarded based on factors relevant to the educational purpose such as scholastic achievement, demonstrated ability, financial need, or a combination of these. They may also be awarded based on achievement in sport or other activities that are connected with, or part of, a school curriculum or program that advances education.
  2. There is no poverty requirement for a purpose that advances education.Footnote 64 Therefore, beneficiaries do not have to demonstrate financial need to be eligible (unless it has been specifically included as a selection criterion).
Information to enable assessment
  1. Organizations that provide scholarships, bursaries, or prizes must ensure the public benefit test is met. They should therefore maintain and be able to provide the following information:
    • the nature of the scholarship, bursary, or prize
    • the eligibility and selection criteria
    • how and where the awards are advertised
    • the process used to select beneficiaries (including whether an application form is required, who is on the selection committee and why they were selected, and whether the organization is represented on the committee)
    • the amounts that are awarded
    • how the funds are distributed (to the student or to the educational institution). If funds are provided in stages based on continuing eligibility (such as by attending a school or maintaining certain grades), information on monitoring ongoing eligibility should be included

Examples


Examples of purposes that advance education by providing scholarships, bursaries, or prizes to students:

  • To advance education by providing science fair awards to middle school students to encourage academic excellence.
  • To advance education by providing bursaries and other financial assistance to students attending (specify) university.
  • To advance education by providing scholarships to students from (specify) school to be used for post-secondary education.

Schools and tuition fees

  1. Establishing and operating a school, college, or university can be a charitable purpose, even if the school charges fees, provided the school is not for private profit.Footnote 65 The presence of fees does not mean a program is not charitable, as long as the public benefit test is met.Footnote 66 For more information, see Policy statement CPS-024, Guidelines for registering a charity: Meeting the public benefit test.

Providing educational facilities, teachers, equipment, and supplies

  1. Providing and maintaining educational facilities (such as schools) that will be used to advance education is a charitable purpose. This is because they are connected with and support education. In the same way, providing teachers for a school, and providing equipment and supplies (such as desks, textbooks, computers, and notebooks), that will be used to advance students’ education are charitable purposes.
  2. Since there is no requirement for an element of poverty in a purpose that advances education, an organization does not have to consider the financial means of recipients.Footnote 67 However, providing educational equipment and supplies may also further a relief of poverty purpose if the beneficiaries are shown to be poor.

Sports and education

  1. The promotion of sport is not a charitable purpose. However, a purpose to educate the students of a school by providing sporting activities and facilities as part of a school curriculum or program can be charitable.Footnote 68 This is the case even if the sporting activity is provided by a separate entity, but takes place in the school context.Footnote 69 This is because the courts have recognized sport as being a necessary element to developing a well-rounded student.Footnote 70
  2. Providing sporting equipment and facilities to a school that includes sport in its curriculum is a purpose that advances education.Footnote 71
  3. A purpose that advances education may be furthered through sport if the sporting activity itself is shown to be a reasonable way to further the purpose and it meets the content and process criteria. For example, an organization set up to teach children life skills, such as teamwork and co-operation, could use a sporting activity, such as baseball, as part of its program. The program must be structured and targeted, and instruction must be provided by a qualified individual.
  4. A school program with an alternative structure (such as one set up to help young athletes complete their academic studies) may advance education if the focus is on academics. A focus on training students in order to develop them as athletes reflects a purpose of promoting sport rather than advancing education.Footnote 72 For more information, see Policy statement CPS-027, Sports and charitable registration.

Community groups and clubs

  1. Instructing children in loyalty, good citizenship, and discipline in the context of youth groups such as Scouts or Guides,Footnote 73 and operating a club to provide chess tournaments to youth,Footnote 74 have been found to be purposes that advance education. Purposes such as operating an after-school club that provides homework help or that teaches arts and crafts or leadership skills to children could also advance education if it meets the content and process criteria.
  2. These programs may include recreational or sports activities if they are shown to be reasonable ways to achieve the educational purpose, and are part of an overall program that advances education.

Alumni associations / School councils

  1. Establishing an alumni association to further the education of students of a school or other educational institution may be a charitable purpose.Footnote 75 Alumni associations often fundraise to support the educational institution, or provide scholarships, bursaries, or prizes to its students.
  2. The focus of the organization must be on education. Social or other activities that do not themselves educate may be acceptable if they are an incidental way of furthering an educational purpose. Any private benefit provided to the association’s members must remain incidental to achieving the charitable purpose.
  3. In the same way, establishing a school council (also known as a parent association or home and school association) to further the education of students of a school may be a charitable purpose. Many school councils provide programs and educational equipment and supplies, such as books, science, or sports equipment to a school,Footnote 76 or provide scholarships or bursaries to its students.
  4. If the alumni association or school council intends to gift funds to an educational institution, the institution would have to be a registered charity or other qualified donee. Most provinces have legislation regulating school councils, and in some provinces school councils must operate under a school board that is a qualified donee. If the school is administered by a board that is a qualified donee, the funds may be paid to the board, which may choose to use the funds to benefit the school.
  5. If the educational institution is not a registered charity or qualified donee, it may be possible for the alumni association or school council to transfer funds to it if a number of conditions are met.Footnote 77

Student unions

  1. Establishing a student union to further the educational purpose of an institution, such as a college or university, may be a charitable purpose.Footnote 78 However, organizations with a purpose to establish a student union often have difficulty conducting their activities without providing more-than-incidental private benefit to members. They may also provide social activities or other activitiesFootnote 79 that are in excess of what is charitable. For more information, see Policy statement CPS-024, Guidelines for registering a charity: Meeting the public benefit test.

Museums and libraries

  1. Establishing and operating a museumFootnote 80 or libraryFootnote 81 that benefits the public, and establishing and operating a library that is connected with a school and benefits its students, may be purposes that advance education. However, a private library that is only open to members is unlikely to be charitable.Footnote 82
  2. Establishing and operating a public museum or library may also be considered charitable under the fourth category of charity, other purposes beneficial to the community in a way the law regards as charitable.Footnote 83

E. Special topics

Production and broadcasting / publishing books, magazines or other materials

  1. Producing and distributing in-depth news and public affairs programs is not a purpose that advances education regardless of whether the programs are distributed by publishing, broadcasting, cable, satellite, or Internet. Even if the programming meets the content criteria, it does not meet the process criteria. In particular, it does not meet the requirement for more than simply providing an opportunity for people to educate themselves.Footnote 84
  2. In the same way, a purpose to produce and distribute (including by publishing or broadcasting) books, magazines, newspapers, films, or documentaries,Footnote 85 must meet both the content and process criteria to be considered to advance education.
  3. Producing educational material may sometimes be a purpose that advances education. For example:
    • producing structured textbooks may meet the content criteria, but does not generally meet the process criteria unless they are used as part of an educational program that includes teaching or learning
    • producing films that are structured to teach particular topics may meet the content criteria, but does not generally meet the process criteria unless they are used as part of an educational program that includes teaching or learning
  4. On the other hand, simply using written material in a classroom does not make the production of that material an educational purpose.Footnote 86 Even if the material meets the content criteria, the structured format component of the process criteria may not be met.
  5. The courts have recognized “the special legal position in Canadian society” of Indigenous people. Providing radio and television programming relevant to Indigenous people, and providing information—including by a newspaper—to the Indigenous community, are charitable purposes under the fourth category.Footnote 87

Conferences

  1. To hold conferences can be a purpose that advances education.Footnote 88 The conferences must meet the content and process criteria. The public part of the public benefit test could be met by any of the following:
    • inviting a sufficient section of the public to attend
    • distributing conference materials to the public (such as by publishing on the Internet or in a journal)
    • showing that participants will share the knowledge obtained at the conference with a sufficient section of the public

Vocational or professional education

  1. Advancing education by providing vocational or professional training can be a charitable purpose.Footnote 89 The focus must be promoting knowledge or skills, not commercial interests. Any private benefit must remain incidental to achieving the charitable purpose.Footnote 90 The training could be to develop skills required for a particular type of employment or the more general “employability” skills needed to obtain and keep employment (for example, resumé writing, organization skills, or language training), and must meet the content and process criteria. Entrepreneurial training, such as how to prepare a business plan, obtain financing, and related skills, may also advance education.
  2. If employment-related training is only provided to employees of a specific employer, it may result in unacceptable private benefit. For more information, see Guidance CG-014, Community economic development activities and charitable registration.

Providing information and education

  1. Simply providing information to the public or attempting to raise public awareness is not a purpose that advances education.Footnote 91 It does not meet the content and process criteria.
  2. However, an organization established to advance an education or other charitable purpose may provide information about its programs to the public or carry out other activities that provide information if the activities are an incidental way to further its charitable purpose.

Experiential education

  1. Although all experience may loosely be considered educational,Footnote 92 in order to advance education under charity law, experiences, such as field trips, outings, and travel (such as student exchanges) must meet the content and process criteria. A field trip or outing that is connected with a formal education curriculum has been found to advance education under charity law.Footnote 93
  2. The courts have also determined that simply providing an opportunity for people to educate themselves by making available tourist accommodation is not a charitable purpose,Footnote 94 despite the appellant’s claim that facilitating travel by providing low-cost accommodation in the form of a youth hostel advanced education.

Preschool and daycare programs

  1. To advance education by providing a preschool or daycare program can be charitable if it meets the content and process criteria. However, providing child care alone is unlikely to meet these criteria.
  2. Providing pre-school or daycare programs may also further a relief of poverty purpose if the beneficiaries are shown to be poor. If the programs further the relief of poverty, the education content and process criteria do not apply.

Summer camps

  1. A purpose to advance education by providing a summer camp can be charitable. An organization must show that the focus of the camp is to educate, and that its educational activities meet the content and process criteria.
  2. Social, recreational, or sports activities can themselves educate if they meet the content and process criteria. For example, a camp activity of teaching the basic elements of safe canoeing and water safety, and then practicing such techniques to reinforce them, could advance an educational purpose. Providing an organized canoe trip for youth that is designed for and focused on teaching skills such as teamwork and leadership, could also further a purpose that advances education.
  3. Activities that do not themselves educate may be acceptable if they are an incidental way of furthering the educational purpose.

Footnotes


Footnote 1

Vancouver Society of Immigrant and Visible Minority Women v MNR, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 10 [Vancouver Society] at para 154, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote1 referrer

Footnote 2

The requirement for exclusively charitable purposes is subject to the common law incidental purposes doctrine, which also applies to incidental charitable activities. This means that a purpose or an activity that is not charitable may be acceptable if it is merely an incidental means of furthering another charitable purpose. See Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at paras 156-159, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote2 referrer

Footnote 3

See National Anti-Vivisection Society v IRC, [1948] AC 31 (HL) [National Anti-Vivisection Society], at p 42, Lord Wright:

Even societies coming within the first three heads of Lord Macnaghten’s classification would not be entitled to rank as legal charities if it was seen that their objects were not for the public benefit ... And trusts for the advancement of learning or education may fail to secure a place as charities, if it is seen that the learning or education is not of public value. The test of benefit to the community goes through the whole of Lord Macnaghten’s classification, though as regards the first three heads, it may be prima facie assumed unless the contrary appears.

And at p 65, Lord Simonds:

... when a purpose appears broadly to fall within one of the familiar categories of charity, the court will assume it to be for the benefit of the community and, therefore, charitable, unless the contrary is shown ...

Return to footnote3 referrer

Footnote 4

See Re Pinion, [1965] Ch 85 (CA), at p 110, Russell LJ.

Return to footnote4 referrer

Footnote 5

See, for example, National Anti-Vivisection Society, supra note 3, at p 42, Lord Wright:

It cannot be for the public benefit to favour trusts for objects contrary to the law.

And at p 65, Lord Simonds:

I will readily concede that, if the purpose is within one of the heads of charity forming the first three classes in the classification which Lord Macnaghten borrowed from Sir Samuel Romilly’s argument in Morice v. Bishop of Durham, the court will easily conclude that it is a charitable purpose. But even here to give the purpose the name of “religious” or “education” is not to conclude the matter. It may yet not be charitable, if the religious purpose is illegal or the educational purpose is contrary to public policy.

And see Everywoman’s Health Centre Society (1988) v MNR, [1992] 2 FC 52, at p 67:

It is well established that an organization will not be charitable in law if its activities are illegal or contrary to public policy ... [citing National Anti-Vivisection Society, at p 65 and 72, Lord Simonds];

And see Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 59, Gonthier, J, dissenting:

It is true that some activities have been deemed to be non-charitable in and of themselves, such as those which are illegal or contrary to public policy (Everywoman’s Health Centre Society, supra, at 67) ...

Return to footnote5 referrer

Footnote 6

A private benefit is a benefit provided to an individual or organization that is not a charitable beneficiary or a benefit provided to a charitable beneficiary that goes beyond what is considered charitable (for example, paying salaries that exceed fair market value).

Return to footnote6 referrer

Footnote 7

See Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 165, Iacobucci J:

... to find that a purpose falls under the second head of charity, one proceeds by way of analogy to other cases found to fall under that head, not by asking whether the purpose would be found to fall within the plain meaning of ‘education’. In other words, the question is what is educational in the way the law of charities uses the term.

And see IRC v Baddeley, [1955] AC 572 (HL), at p 585, Viscount Simonds:

... regarded as a whole, the sum of the activities permissible under the deed can only be regarded as educational in the sort of loose sense in which all experience may be said to be educative, and that, if such activities are examined one by one, it would be impossible to regard many of them as in even the loosest sense educational.

Return to footnote7 referrer

Footnote 8

The courts have recognized certain other purposes that support purposes that teach or train, as discussed in section D of this guidance. Also, purposes that educate through research do not require teaching or training.

Return to footnote8 referrer

Footnote 9

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at paras 161-168, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote9 referrer

Footnote 10

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 169, Iacobucci J: “To limit the notion of “training of the mind” to structured, systematic instruction or traditional academic subjects reflects an outmoded and under inclusive understanding of education which is of little use in modern Canadian society.”

Return to footnote10 referrer

Footnote 11

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at paras 168-171, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote11 referrer

Footnote 12

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 171, Iacobucci J:

That is not to say that education should be broadened beyond recognition, however. Even while advocating a more inclusive approach to education, the Ontario Law Reform Commission also cautioned against treating as educational those activities which, although they advance legitimate goods, do not include any actual teaching or learning component. The concern is that, in certain cases, activities which fit awkwardly with the concept of education—such as, for example, a trust to assist the publication of unknown authors—seem to have been accorded charitable status under that category nonetheless, mainly because they did not fall within any of the other categories. I would agree with that caution. To my mind, the threshold criterion for an educational activity must be some legitimate, targeted attempt at educating others, whether through formal or informal instruction, training, plans of self-study, or otherwise. Simply providing an opportunity for people to educate themselves, such as by making available materials with which this might be accomplished but need not be, is not enough. (Emphasis added)

Return to footnote12 referrer

Footnote 13

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 150, Iacobucci J:

In the absence of legislative reform, Canadian courts must contend with the difficulty of articulating how the law of charities is to keep “moving” in a manner that is consistent with the nature of the common law. As this Court held in R. v. Salituro, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 654, at p. 670:

Judges can and should adapt the common law to reflect the changing social, moral and economic fabric of the country. Judges should not be quick to perpetuate rules whose social foundation has long since disappeared. Nonetheless, there are significant constraints on the power of the judiciary to change the law. As McLachlin J. indicated in Watkins, supra, in a constitutional democracy such as ours it is the legislature and not the courts which has the major responsibility for law reform; and for any changes to the law which may have complex ramifications, however necessary or desirable such changes may be, they should be left to the legislature. The judiciary should confine itself to those incremental changes which are necessary to keep the common law in step with the dynamic and evolving fabric of our society.

There are thus limits to the law reform that may be undertaken by the judiciary.

and at para 159:

In the absence of legislative reform providing guidelines, the best way in which to discern the charitable quality of an organization’s purposes is to continue to proceed by way of analogy to those purposes already found to be charitable by the common law, and conveniently classified in Pemsel, subject always to the general requirement of providing a benefit to the community, and with an eye to society’s current social, moral, and economic context.

Return to footnote13 referrer

Footnote 14

The CRA now considers purposes that advance the public’s appreciation of the arts under the fourth category of charity—other purposes beneficial to the community in a way the law regards as charitable. For more information, see Guidance CG-018, Arts activities and charitable registration. Teaching or training in the arts, however, is still considered under the advancement of education.

Return to footnote14 referrer

Footnote 15

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 168, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote15 referrer

Footnote 16

In this guidance, self-study (or distance learning) means education with a defined goal, a plan, and content that is capable of furthering the goal, prepared by a qualified individual, without direct instruction or physical attendance in a class. To be considered to advance education under charity law, self-study or distance learning should meet the content and process criteria set out in this guidance.

Return to footnote16 referrer

Footnote 17

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 169, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote17 referrer

Footnote 18

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 171, Iacobucci J, where the court refers to this as “the threshold criterion for an educational activity ...”

Return to footnote18 referrer

Footnote 19

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 171, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote19 referrer

Footnote 20

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 170, Iacobucci J; and see Re Pinion, supra note 4, at p 107, Harman LJ.

Return to footnote20 referrer

Footnote 21

See Re Schultz’s Estate, [1961] SASR 377(German studies); Re Mason, [1971] NZLR 714 (law); Re Corbett, (1921) 17 Tax LR 139 (economics); Re Spencer, [1928] 34 OWN 29 (geology), referenced in Picarda, The Law and Practice Relating to Charities, 4th ed (West Sussex: Bloomsbury Professional, 2010) Ch 4 [Picarda]

Return to footnote21 referrer

Footnote 22

See Re Pinion, supra note 4, at p 107, Harman LJ.

Return to footnote22 referrer

Footnote 23

Re Pinion, supra note 4, at p 105, Harman LJ.

Return to footnote23 referrer

Footnote 24

See Picarda, supra note 21, at p 70, where the author states: “A trust for teaching ‘some irrational belief, as that the earth is flat’ would not qualify as charitable (Eckles v Lounsberry 253 Iowa 172, 11 NW 2d 638, at 642 (1961).”

Return to footnote24 referrer

Footnote 25

See section B of this guidance: The public benefit requirement.

Return to footnote25 referrer

Footnote 26

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at paras 168 and 170, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote26 referrer

Footnote 27

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 172, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote27 referrer

Footnote 28

See Re Pinion, supra note 4, at p 107, Harman LJ, where the court considered expert evidence before concluding that the subject matter had neither public utility nor educational value. See also Re Hummeltenberg (1923) 1 Ch 237.

Return to footnote28 referrer

Footnote 29

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at paras 169-171, Iacobucci J. The court said, at para 169, that information or training provided “ ... solely to promote a particular point of view or political orientation” does not advance education. And, at para 171, it is not enough to ‘educate’ “ ... about a particular point of view in a manner that might more aptly be described as persuasion or indoctrination.”

Return to footnote29 referrer

Footnote 30

See Positive Action Against Pornography v MNR, [1988] 2 FC 340 (FCA), at para 9:

There is simply the presentation to the public of selected items of information and opinion on the subject of pornography. That, in my view, cannot be regarded as educational in the sense understood by this branch of the law.

The court in Vancouver Society, supra note 1, referred to this passage and stated, at para 164, Iacobucci J:

Clearly such biased material, in most cases, would disqualify an organization from the second head of charity without necessitating an inquiry into whether the organization pursued some kind of formal training of the mind, broadly understood.

See also Alliance for Life v MNR, [1999] 3 FC 504 (FCA) [Alliance for Life], at paras 57-58.

Return to footnote30 referrer

Footnote 31

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 169, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote31 referrer

Footnote 32

See Alliance for Life, supra note 30, at paras 57-58 and 68. After stating that the materials were not provided in a structured manner Stone JA said at para 57:

Neither is there evidence that such students would be in a position to weigh the viewpoints so advanced against opposing viewpoints in making up their minds ... Viewed in this light, I am unable to see that the dissemination ... genuinely advanced education in the sense explained in Vancouver Society ...

And see Challenge Team v Revenue Canada, [2000] 2 CTC 352 (FCA) :

... educating people from a particular political or moral perspective may be educational in the charitable sense in that it enables listeners to make an informed and critical choice. However, an activity is not educational in the charitable sense when it is undertaken ‘solely to promote a particular point of view’ (per Iacobucci J. in Vancouver ... ).

Return to footnote32 referrer

Footnote 33

See Southwood v A.G., [2000] WL 877698 (CA), at para 6:

The relevant question is whether the ‘advancement of the education of the public in the subject of militarism and disarmament and related fields’ promotes public benefit. If it does, the trust can be recognised as charitable. If it does not – or if, after investigation of the evidence, the court is satisfied that there is no means of determining whether it does or not - the trust cannot be recognised as charitable.” And at para 29: “I would have no difficulty in accepting the proposition that it promotes public benefit for the public to be educated in the differing means of securing a state of peace and avoiding a state of war. The difficulty comes at the next stage. There are differing views as to how best to secure peace and avoid war. To give two obvious examples: on the one hand it can be contended that war is best avoided by 'bargaining through strength'; on the other hand it can be argued, with equal passion, that peace is best secured by disarmament, if necessary by unilateral disarmament. The court is in no position to determine that promotion of the one view rather than the other is for the public benefit. Not only does the court have no material on which to make that choice; to attempt to do so would usurp the role of government. So the court cannot recognize as charitable a trust to educate the public to an acceptance that peace is best secured by 'demilitarisation' ...

Return to footnote33 referrer

Footnote 34

See Re Koeppler Will Trusts; Barclays Bank Trust Co. Ltd. v Slack and others, [1984] 2 All ER 869 (CA), where conferences were to be held to examine a wide variety of topics through discussion among people with differing views. Particular care was taken “ ... to avoid inculcating any particular political viewpoint.” The court found that the activities therefore advanced education in that the participants were likely to benefit from the courses and “ ... are likely to pass on such benefits to others.” At p 878, Slade LJ said: “ ... even when they [the education activities] touch on political matters, they constitute, so far as I can see, no more than genuine attempts in an objective manner to ascertain and disseminate the truth.”

Return to footnote34 referrer

Footnote 35

See Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at paras 169-171, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote35 referrer

Footnote 36

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 169, Iacobucci J:

In the case of education, the good advanced is knowledge or training. Thus, so long as information or training is provided in a structured manner and for a genuinely educational purpose -- that is, to advance the knowledge or abilities of the recipients -- and not solely to promote a particular point of view or political orientation, it may properly be viewed as falling within the advancement of education.

Return to footnote36 referrer

Footnote 37

See Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at paras 170-171, Iacobucci J; See also News to You Canada v MNR, (2011) FCA 192, at para 17:

Though I agree that the production and dissemination of in-depth news and public affairs programs may improve the sum of communicable knowledge about current affairs, such activities are not sufficiently structured for educational purposes. The appellant’s audience is merely being offered news and public affairs content. This may provide an opportunity for that audience to improve its knowledge of current affairs, but this offering is, at best, nothing more than the provision of an opportunity for individuals to educate themselves through the availability of materials with which this might be accomplished, but need not be. In Vancouver Society such an opportunity was found not to meet the requisite threshold for acceptance as a charitable purpose related to the advancement of education.

Return to footnote37 referrer

Footnote 38

Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 171, Iacobucci J:

Even while advocating a more inclusive approach to education, the Ontario Law Reform Commission also cautioned against treating as educational those activities which, although they advance legitimate goods, do not include any actual teaching or learning component ... I would agree with that caution.

Return to footnote38 referrer

Footnote 39

See Oppenheim v Tobacco Securities Trust Co. Ltd. [1951] AC 297 (HL) [Oppenheim], at p 306, Lord Simonds; and Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 145, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote39 referrer

Footnote 40

See Re Mackenzie [1962] 2 All ER 890 (Ch D).

Return to footnote40 referrer

Footnote 41

See Thompson v Thompson, [1844] 63 ER 464 (prizes for essays of students in literature); and Re Mariette, [1915] 2 Ch 284 (Ch D) (annual prize for classics, and for school athletic sports event).

Return to footnote41 referrer

Footnote 42

The research should meet the legal requirements set out in Policy statement CPS-029, Research as a charitable activity.

Return to footnote42 referrer

Footnote 43

Associated expenses include expenses reasonably required in order to pursue education as defined in this guidance.

Return to footnote43 referrer

Footnote 44

See Re Weaver, [1963] VR 257 (And where a prize is cash, the mere fact that it can be used for any purpose does not deprive it of its charitable nature since the prize is to encourage academic achievement.)

Return to footnote44 referrer

Footnote 45

See Keren Kayemeth Le Jisroel Ltd. v Inland Revenue Commissioners, [1932] AC 650; and Williams’ Trustees v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, [1947] AC 447.

Return to footnote45 referrer

Footnote 46

See Oppenheim, supra note 39; and Re Worth Library, [1995] 2 IR 301, at p 336, where a library available only to three named persons was insufficient to advance education. See also Co-operative College of Canada v Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, [1975] 64 DLR (3d) 531 at p 537; and Vancouver Society, supra note 1, at para 174, Iacobucci J.

Return to footnote46 referrer

Footnote 47

See IRC v Baddeley, supra note 7, at pages 591-92, Viscount Simonds; and Re Welton, [1950] 2 DLR 280 (NSSC) (annual prize to female student).

Return to footnote47 referrer

Footnote 48

See Re Worth Library, supra note 46.

Return to footnote48 referrer

Footnote 49

This includes natural or legal persons, such as corporations or organizations. The important principle was stated in Oppenheim, supra note 39, at p 306, Lord Simonds:

... the quality which distinguishes them from other members of the community, so that they form by themselves a section of it, must be a quality which does not depend on their relationship to a particular individual. ... A group of persons may be numerous but, if the nexus between them is their personal relationship to a single propositus or to several propositi, they are neither the community nor a section of the community for charitable purposes.

Return to footnote49 referrer

Footnote 50

See In Re Compton, [1945] Ch 123 (CA) (descendants of three named individuals); and Laverty v Laverty, [1907] 1 IR 9 (any male with particular surname).

Return to footnote50 referrer

Footnote 51

See Oppenheim, supra note 39; and IRC v Educational Grants Association, [1967] 2 All ER 893 (CA).

Return to footnote51 referrer

Footnote 52

See L.I.U.N.A. Local 527 Members’ Training Trust Fund v The Queen, (1992) 92 DTC 2365 (TCC) (union); and Waterson and Others v Hendon Borough Council, [1959] 2 All ER 760 (QB) (society).

Return to footnote52 referrer

Footnote 53

See In Re Compton, supra note 50, at p 128: “mere numbers cannot raise a family or private benefaction into the class of charitable gifts.”

Return to footnote53 referrer

Footnote 54

See Oppenheim, supra note 39.

Return to footnote54 referrer

Footnote 55

See Re Welton, supra note 47, and Oppenheim, supra note 39.

Return to footnote55 referrer

Footnote 56

See Re Welsh Hospital (Netley) Fund, Thomas v A-G, [1921] 1 Ch 655 (Ch D).

Return to footnote56 referrer

Footnote 57

See Re Welton, supra note 47.

Return to footnote57 referrer

Footnote 58

See Herbert v Cyr and Lynch, [1944] 2 DLR 374 (NBSC).

Return to footnote58 referrer

Footnote 59

See Re Ramsden Estate, [1996] 139 DLR (4th) 746 (PEISC); and University of Victoria v British Columbia (Attorney General), [2000] BCJ No 520 (BCSC); but see Canada Trust Co. v Ontario Human Rights Commission (Re Leonard), [1990] 69 DLR (4th) 321 (OCA).

Return to footnote59 referrer

Footnote 60

See IRC v Baddeley, supra note 7.

Return to footnote60 referrer

Footnote 61

See Davies v Perpetual Trustee, [1959] AC 439 (PC), at p 456; and IRC v Baddeley, supra note 7, at p 615, Lord Somervell:

I cannot accept the principle submitted by the respondents that a section of the public sufficient to support a valid trust in one category must as a matter of law be sufficient to support a trust in any other category. I think that difficulties are apt to arise if one seeks to consider the class apart from the particular nature of the charitable purpose. They are, in my opinion, interdependent.

Return to footnote61 referrer

Footnote 62

See Herbert v Cyr and Lynch, [1944] 2 DLR 374, where an educational trust for poor children of merit, “my relatives to have preference”, was charitable, and Public Trustees v Young, (1980) 24 SASR 407, where a scholarship with preference to employees, “all other things being equal”, was charitable. See also discussion in Picarda, supra note 21, at pages 78-80, concluding that if the preferred class received too large a proportion, it would be unreasonable, and therefore not charitable.

Return to footnote62 referrer

Footnote 63

See Re Leonard, supra note 59, where a trust premised on notions of racism and religious superiority (that one race or one religion was intrinsically better than another) was found to contravene contemporary Canadian public policy, in which equality rights are constitutionally guaranteed and the multicultural heritage is to be preserved and enhanced. The court said, however, that restrictions based on factors such as religion, ethnic origin, sex or language will not necessarily offend public policy. And see subsequent cases of Re Ramsden Estate, supra note 59, and University of Victoria v British Columbia (Attorney General), supra note 59, where the courts upheld gifts restricted to persons of certain religions, and distinguished them from Re Leonard on the basis that there was no blatant religious supremacy or racism. But see Royal Trust Corp. of Canada v University of Western Ontario, 2016 ONSC 1143, where the court cited Re Leonard and found restrictions based on race, gender, marital status, and sexual orientation were contrary to public policy since the restrictions left no doubt as to the testator’s intention to discriminate on these grounds. See also Re Esther G. Castanera Scholarship Fund, 2015 MBQB 28, where the court also cited Re Leonard and University of Victoria, supra note 59, and found a scholarship restricted to women was acceptable as there was no blatant superiority; rather, a desire to encourage women in a historically male-dominated field.

Return to footnote63 referrer

Footnote 64

See R. v Income Tax Special Comrs., ex p University College of North Wales, (1909) 78 LJKB 576 (CA).

Return to footnote64 referrer

Footnote 65

See Abbey, Malvern Wells Ltd v Ministry of Local Government and Planning [1951] Ch 728 (Ch D); and Brighton College v Marriott [1926] AC 192 (HL) (school for sons of noblemen).

Return to footnote65 referrer

Footnote 66

See, for example, Re Cottam's Will Trusts, [1955] 3 All ER 704 (Ch D), at p 705: "The fact that persons have to pay something ... under a trust of a charitable nature does not necessarily render that trust one that is not a charitable trust ... "

Return to footnote66 referrer

Footnote 67

See R. v Income Tax Special Comrs., supra note 64.

Return to footnote67 referrer

Footnote 68

See AYSA Amateur Youth Soccer Association v CRA, [2007] 3 S.C.R. 217, at para 40:

“The trend of the cases supports the proposition that sport, if ancillary to another recognized charitable purpose such as education, can be charitable, but not sport in itself.”

Return to footnote68 referrer

Footnote 69

See IRC v McMullen [1981] AC 1 (HL) where a sports league limited to school-aged and university students, as an adjunct to their formal education, was viewed as charitable because it focused on their physical education and development.

Return to footnote69 referrer

Footnote 70

See Waters, Law of Trusts in Canada (4th ed) (2012), at p 769, where the author noted: “physical health has long been recognized as a necessary complement of the mental well-being which education requires of its students.” See also IRC v McMullen, supra note 69; Re Mariette, supra note 41; Kearins v Kearins, [1957] SR (NSW) 286 (SCNSW).

Return to footnote70 referrer

Footnote 71

See Re Mariette, supra note 41; Re Geere’s Will Trusts (No. 2) [1954] CLT 388; and IRC v McMullen, supra note 69.

Return to footnote71 referrer

Footnote 72

See Re Patten, [1929] 2 Ch 276 (Ch D), where a fund for teaching and coaching young low-income cricketers to enable them to become professionals and further interest in the sport of cricket was not charitable.

Return to footnote72 referrer

Footnote 73

See Re Alexander, (1932) The Times, 30 June, applied in Re Webber [1954] 1WLR 1500 (Ch D).

Return to footnote73 referrer

Footnote 74

See Re Dupree’s Deed Trusts [1945] Ch 16 (Ch D), where a trust to promote annual chess tournaments among boys under 21 years was held charitable. Evidence was provided that playing chess was of considerable educational value to youth.

Return to footnote74 referrer

Footnote 75

See Guaranty Trust Co. of Canada v MNR, [1967] S.C.R. 133 [Guaranty Trust].

Return to footnote75 referrer

Footnote 76

For more information on providing such resources, see section 3.2 of Guidance CG-004, Using an intermediary to carry out a charity’s activities within Canada.

Return to footnote76 referrer

Footnote 77

For further information, see Guidance CG-004.

Return to footnote77 referrer

Footnote 78

See A-G v Ross, [1986] 1 WLR 252 (Ch D); and London Hospital v IRC, [1976] 1 WLR 613 (Ch D).

Return to footnote78 referrer

Footnote 79

See Baldry v Feintuck, [1972] 1 WLR 552 (Ch D).

Return to footnote79 referrer

Footnote 80

See Re Allsop (1884) 1 TLR 4 (Ch D).

Return to footnote80 referrer

Footnote 81

See Abbott v Fraser (1874) LR 6 PC 96.

Return to footnote81 referrer

Footnote 82

See Carne v Long (1860) 2 De GF & J 75; and Re Worth Library, supra note 46, where the court cited Oppenheim (supra note 39) and said a library available only to the physician, chaplain, and surgeon of a hospital was insufficient to advance education, but was charitable under the fourth category as it benefited a hospital, in part because it was, at p 340: “the holders of the offices, and not named individuals” who benefit.

Return to footnote82 referrer

Footnote 83

See British Museum Trustees v White [1826] 2 Sim & St 594; and Abbott v Fraser, supra note 81.

Return to footnote83 referrer

Footnote 84

See News to You, supra note 37, at para 17:

... such activities are not sufficiently structured for educational purposes. The appellant’s audience is merely being offered news and public affairs content. This may provide an opportunity for that audience to improve its knowledge of current affairs, but this offering is, at best, nothing more than the provision of an opportunity for individuals to educate themselves through the availability of materials with which this might be accomplished, but need not be.

Return to footnote84 referrer

Footnote 85

See Alliance for Life, supra note 30, where the court considered articles and information in packages sent to libraries. It reviewed paragraphs 168 – 171 of Vancouver Society, including the caution the court expressed, that “Simply providing an opportunity for people to educate themselves, ... ” is not enough, and concluded: “It seems to me that the library packages in question must be viewed in this light.” After stating that much of the materials were aimed at promoting the appellant’s viewpoints on issues like abortion and euthanasia, the court said, at para 40: “Nor is the information provided in a structured manner that would genuinely advance education. While students accessing school or public libraries would be afforded the opportunity of drawing on these particular materials, there is no evidence that they would be required or be likely to do so.” The court concluded the dissemination of the library packages did not genuinely advance education as set out in Vancouver Society.

Return to footnote85 referrer

Footnote 86

See Briarpatch Inc v The Queen, [1996] FCJ No. 444 (FCA), at para 9:

It is evident that the magazine is not directed toward the training of the mind through structured analysis or presentation of knowledge. I agree with counsel for the Minister that the publication lacks the continuity, structure and analysis needed to meet those tests. I also agree that the fact that the magazine is used for classroom purposes in universities does not render it educational in the charitable sense.

Return to footnote86 referrer

Footnote 87

See Native Communications Society of BC v Canada (MNR), [1986] 3 FC 471 (FCA).

Return to footnote87 referrer

Footnote 88

See Re Koeppler Will Trusts, supra note 34, at p 877:

No one would suggest that the mere organization and conduct of conferences, albeit dealing with topics of public interest, would necessarily constitute a charitable activity. If such activities are to be charitable, they must be shown to be for the benefit of the public, or the community, in a sense or manner within the intendment of the preamble to the Statute of Elizabeth ...

At p 878, the court indicated that participants are likely to benefit from the courses and “are likely to pass on such benefits to others.”

Finally, at p 877, in finding the conferences to be educational, the court noted the lower court statement:

(i) the conferences sought to improve the minds of participants, not necessarily by adding to their factual knowledge but by expanding their wisdom and capacity to understand; (ii) the subjects discussed at conferences were recognised academic subjects in higher education; (iii) the conferences operated by a process of discussion designed to elicit an exchange of views in a manner familiar in places of higher education; (iv) the conferences were designed to capitalise on the expertise of participants who were there both to learn and to instruct.

Return to footnote88 referrer

Footnote 89

See Re Central Employment Bureau for Women, [1942] 1 All ER 232 (Ch D), at p 233:

So far as it is educational, it is a good charity, because I cannot distinguish between a gift for the advancement of education in general terms and a gift for the purpose of educating individuals in such manner as will be most conducive to their earning their living, as, for instance, if this had been a gift for apprenticeships. So far as it is a gift for educational purposes, it is a good charity.

Return to footnote89 referrer

Footnote 90

See Guaranty Trust, supra note 75, at p 142, where the court referred with approval to Royal College of Surgeons of England v National Provincial Bank Ltd, [1952] AC 631 (HL).

Return to footnote90 referrer

Footnote 91

See D’aguair v Guyana Commissioner of Inland Revenue, (1970) 49 ATC 33.

Return to footnote91 referrer

Footnote 92

See IRC v Baddeley, supra note 7, at p 585, Viscount Simmonds:

... regarded as a whole, the sum of the activities permissible under the deed can only be regarded as educational in the sort of loose sense in which all experience may be said to be educative, and that, if such activities are examined one by one, it would be impossible to regard many of them as in even the loosest sense educational.

Return to footnote92 referrer

Footnote 93

See Re Mellody, [1918] 1 Ch 228 (Ch D), where the court found an annual field day for schoolchildren to be charitable as advancing education in that they learned about nature, and it was an incentive to attendance and hard work at school.

Return to footnote93 referrer

Footnote 94

See Hostelling International Canada – Ontario East Region v MNR (2008) FCA 396.

Return to footnote94 referrer


Page details

2020-11-27