Scottish Charity Regulator v ME Foundation [2008] ScotCS CSOH_62 (23 April 2008)

Scottish Charity Regulator v ME Foundation [2008] ScotCS CSOH_62 (23 April 2008)

The averments in Answers 3 and 24, as currently framed, do not properly articulate the relevance of OSCR's use of statutory powers or proportionality to the court's discretion under section 34. The respondents are given an opportunity to amend their pleadings to clarify their position; otherwise, the challenged averments will be excluded from probation.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSOH_62
Parties
Petitioner: Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR); Respondent: ME Foundation; Respondent/director: Helen Armstrong; Respondent/director: Findlay Armstrong; Respondent/director: George Smart; Respondent/director: Agnes Smart
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
23 April 2008
Procedural Posture
Petition for Orders Under Charities and Trustee Investment (scotland) Act 2005 / Interlocutory Hearing on Exclusion of Averments From Probation
Outcome
Case put out By Order to allow respondents to amend pleadings; question of expenses reserved.
Legal Topics
Misconduct in Charity Administration, Powers of Scottish Charity Regulator, Court Discretion Under Charities Act, Appointment of Judicial Factor, Proportionality in Regulatory Action
Charity Law Administrative Law Misconduct in Charity Administration Powers of Scottish Charity Regulator Court Discretion Under Charities Act Appointment of Judicial Factor Proportionality in Regulatory Action

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scottish Charity Regulator (OSCR)

Petitioner

ME Foundation

Respondent

Helen Armstrong

Respondent/director

Findlay Armstrong

Respondent/director

George Smart

Respondent/director

Agnes Smart

Respondent/director

Procedural Posture

Petition for Orders Under Charities and Trustee Investment (scotland) Act 2005 / Interlocutory Hearing on Exclusion of Averments From Probation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain averments in the respondents' answers should be excluded from probation
  2. 2 Whether OSCR was required to use less severe statutory remedies before petitioning the court under section 34
  3. 3 Whether the court may consider proportionality and alternative remedies in exercising discretion under section 34

Ratio Decidendi

The averments in Answers 3 and 24, as currently framed, do not properly articulate the relevance of OSCR's use of statutory powers or proportionality to the court's discretion under section 34. The respondents are given an opportunity to amend their pleadings to clarify their position; otherwise, the challenged averments will be excluded from probation.

Court Disposition

Case put out By Order to allow respondents to amend pleadings; question of expenses reserved.

Orders

  • Respondents given opportunity to amend Answers 3 and 24 to clarify relevance to court's discretion under section 34.
  • If not amended, challenged averments to be excluded from probation.