判决理由
A trust whose main purpose is to change the law cannot be charitable because the court cannot determine whether the proposed change would be for the public benefit. Additionally, a purpose may not be charitable if its detriment (to medical research) outweighs its benefit.
事实
The National Anti-Vivisection Society sought charitable status. Its main object was the total abolition of vivisection, which would require legislative change. The Crown argued it was not charitable.
判决摘要
The House of Lords held the society was not charitable for two reasons: first, its main purpose was political (seeking a change in the law) which courts cannot evaluate for public benefit; second, even if the object were charitable, the detriment to medical research outweighed any benefit to animals.
关键引述
"The court has no means of judging whether a proposed change in the law will or will not be for the public benefit, and therefore cannot say that a trust for securing such a change is a charitable trust."
— Lord Simonds
后续处理
Remains authority on the exclusion of political purposes from charity, though modified by the Charities Act 2011 regarding ancillary political activity.