A trust, which was a charitable foundation, did not qualify as a public foundation as it had a single trustee (a registered trust company). Dawson JA stated (at paras. 30-33) that the references to "more than 50%" of the other trustees, the trustees dealing with "each other," and their dealing "at arm's length" (and "[m]oreover, a single trustee is not at arm's length from itself") showed an unequivocal intention that there be multiple trustees. Furthermore, an examination of the legislative context and purpose indicated that "the requirement that there be more than one arm's length trustee provides greater assurance that a public foundation will not be used for tax avoidance purposes" (para. 42).
Topics and taglines
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
334306
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em><a name=\"SheldonIntewash\"></a>Sheldon Intewash and Lynn Factor Charitable Foundation v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2012 FCA 136",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": ""
}
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em><a name=\"SheldonIntewash\"></a>Sheldon Intewash and Lynn Factor Charitable Foundation v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2012 FCA 136",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": ""
}