Ahmed v Uddin: the court considers the factors at play when considering whether to give permission to bring charity proceedings

The High Court considered an application in August for Claimants to be granted permission to commence litigation classed as charity proceedings. This followed the Charity Commission's refusal of permission previously.

Charity proceedings are those that relate to the internal administration and/or domestic affairs of a charity. These types of proceedings require authorisation from the Charity Commission or, if refused, by an order of a High Court judge sitting in the Chancery Division.

The Claimants were former members of a charitable unincorporated association operating a mosque. They had been suspended and their membership subsequently terminated as a result of an altercation that took place at the mosque. 

The Claimants predominantly sought injunctive and declaratory relief against the charity arguing that the suspension and termination of their membership did not occur in line with the procedures under the charity's constitution and that each decision had not been taken in the best interests of the charity.

Whilst the High Court held that the Claimants had standing to bring the claim and that there was a viable claim to bring, permission to bring the proceedings was not given. 

The High Court held that the financial position of the charity were proceedings to ensue, meant that permission should not be given under section 115 Charities Act 2011. It is of note that this was held to be the case, even though damages were not the predominant remedy sought. The estimated four-to-five-day trial that the judge believed would result, and the complexity of the case was considered to be enough to mean that the charity would experience too much financial strain and that permission should be refused.  

The High Court echoed the words of Norris J and believed that refusing permission to bring litigation would be the 'least worst course for the charity'.