In a judgment delivered today Mullins J:

  • considered whether a scholarship had been disclaimed by a beneficiary in circumstances where the beneficiary objected to some of the conditions of  the gift – she held it had been
  • considered whether the disclaimer could be retracted – whilst some circumstances in which a disclaimer could be retracted were discussed, she held it had not been in this case
  • in any event, found that there was a general charitable intention and ordered a cy pres scheme (to be administered by the original donee of the gift)

Read Bennett v The Royal Australian Institute of Architects here.