Talk:Unincorporated association

Possible re-structure
In order only roughly: OnceATeacher (talk) 11:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Better definition
 * 2) Clarify scope - common law jurisdictions only?
 * 3) Examples
 * 4) Formation
 * 5) Legal personality - lack of and exceptions
 * 6) Dissolution (Hanchett-Stamford)
 * 7) Peculiarities arising from lack of legal personality
 * 8) Historical trend to incorporation

Eteb3's notes of quotes possibly useful for this page
Societies can manage to operate by means of a few rather strained devices, through which they play a game of 'let's pretend', and few could regard this as satisfactory. F. Vincent http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/MelbULawRw/1958/20.pdf

THE legal practitioner who finds himself from time to time con- cerned in actions on behalf of, or against ' bodies ' (to use a neutral term) which apparently exist and carry on their affairs as units, but which in law are not incorporated, will require no persuading that such ' bodies' can, and usually do, give rise to very troublesome questions, both in matters of law and procdure.

This is especially misleading to third parties, because to the outside world they seem to possess just as much col- lective capacity as any corporation, they appear to occupy premises, own funds, act through duly appointed officers, describe themselves by a collective name and purport to engage in transactions with tradesmen and others under that name. It is only when such transactions give rise to legal disputes and it is desired to institute proceedings, that it emerges that the collective name is a mere facade concealing, but not altering, the hard legal fact that, in law, the association is a mere sum of individuals, without any collective capacity to sue or be sued as such. (p. 410)

Dennis Lloyd Modern Law Review 12 (October 1949) "Actions instituted by or against unincorporated bodies"

If another legal form has not been selected, the residual form of liability regulation will apply to the actions of a group. There are two residual legal forms that govern group activity. Where the members of a group carry on a business in common with a view to profit, the law of partnership applies.' All other arrangements, with few exceptions,2 are subject to the common law that has evolved to govern the legal positions of members.

Contractual Responsibility in Non-Profit Associations Author(s): Robert Flannigan Source: Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, Vol. 18, No. 4 (Winter, 1998), pp. 631-659 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/764695 Accessed: 22-11-2019 14:16 UTC

The basic contractual liability structure of associations was developed in England in the nineteenth century.

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 General

10 Quasi-corporate status of trade unions. (1)A trade union is not a body corporate but— (a)it is capable of making contracts; (b)it is capable of suing and being sued in its own name, whether in proceedings relating to property or founded on contract or tort or any other cause of action; and (c)proceedings for an offence alleged to have been committed by it or on its behalf may be brought against it in its own name. (2)A trade union shall not be treated as if it were a body corporate except to the extent authorised by the provisions of this Part. (3)A trade union shall not be registered— (a)as a company under the [F1the Companies Act 2006], or (b)under the M1Friendly Societies Act 1974 or the [F2 the Co-operative and Community Benefit Societies Act 2014 ]; and any such registration of a trade union (whenever effected) is void.

Eteb3 (talk) 21:15, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Large section removed from main page 23 Nov 2019, kept for reference/reuse
Several theories have been proposed as to the way that such associations hold rights. A transfer may be considered to have been made to the association's members directly as joint tenants or tenants in common. Alternatively, the funds transferred may be considered to have been under the terms of a private purpose trust. Many purpose trusts fail for want of a beneficiary and this may therefore result in the gift failing. However, some purpose trusts are valid, and, accordingly, some cases have decided that the rights associated with unincorporated associations are held on this basis. The dominant theory, however, is that the rights are transferred to the members or officers absolutely, perhaps on trust for the members, but are importantly bound by contracts inter se.

Accordingly, on dissolution, the distribution of these rights depends on how they were held. A purpose trust may by its nature survive the dissolution of the association, or it may not. If it fails as a result of the dissolution, then the rights will be held on resulting trust for the contributors, unless they can be shown to have renounced their right to such a trust in their favour. If the rights are held subject to contract, then they will be divided among the surviving membership upon dissolution, according to the terms of the contracts inter se or an implied term according to contribution. If, as a result of this contract or statute, no member can claim, the rights will pass to the Crown as bona vacantia. This conclusion has also been suggested where the association dissolves because only one members remains, although this has been doubted by some commentators who believe the last members should be entitled to the rights. Eteb3 (talk) 21:28, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

sandeepkuma29383@gm il.com 2409:4089:BCCB:DDAC:5C82:E01B:51F9:5014 (talk) 16:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)