CHARITIES BILL
Amendment 98
Page 77 line 15
Remove sub-paragraph 2(1)
Paragraph 2 of new Schedule 1C of the 1993 Act relates to hearings, by the Tribunal, of appeals against orders made by the Charity Commission under Section 9 of the Charities Act 1993. Section 9 provides:
“(1) The Commissioners may by order –
(a) require any person to furnish them with any information in his possession which relates to any charity and is relevant to the discharge of their functions or the functions of the official custodian;
(b) require any person who has in his custody or under his control any document which relates to any charity and is relevant to the discharge of their functions or the functions of the official custodian –
(i) to furnish them with a copy of or extract from the document or
(unless the document forms part of the records or other documents of a court or of a public or local authority) to transmit the document itself to them for their inspection.”
Schedule 4 of the Bill (page 79 lines 46-52) allows anyone who is required, by an order under Section 9, to produce information/documents, to appeal to the Tribunal against the order. The Tribunal may, according to Schedule 4, quash the order or substitute any order that the Commission could have made.
However, sub-paragraph 2(1) of Schedule 4 limits the power of the Tribunal in considering such an appeal, such that the Tribunal may not consider the contents of the Commission’s order.
Sub-paragraphs (2) and (3) further restrict the Tribunal’s powers in relation to appeal against section 9 orders. According to paragraph 2 as a whole, the Tribunal may only allow the appeal if the document/information (a) does not relate to a charity or (b) is irrelevant to the discharge of the Commission's/official custodian's functions. In other words, the Tribunal may not consider whether the Commission was making proper use of its powers in making the order in the first place and quash it on that basis.
We can see no rationale for treating section 9 orders differently to other matters. It would be preferable for the whole of paragraph 2 to be removed, with section 9 orders being treated either according to the general appeals process prescribed in paragraph 1 or as a reviewable matter, under paragraphs 3 and 4.
