What duties do members of academy trusts have?
In this article, we review what duties they undertake and consider how these are different from what they set out to be.
With the continuing focus on academy trust governance and the development of DfE policy in response to events in the sector we are seeing increased interest and focus on the role and duties of members of academy trusts (Members). In this article, we review what duties they undertake and consider how these might be different from what they set out to be.
The role of Members is prescribed under company law and the academy trust’s articles of association (Articles). So, for example, company law provides that members can alter the Articles, appoint the auditors and remove a trustee/the trustees.
The DfE has also published guidance and the 2019 version of its governance handbook continues to include a section on Members (see pages 48-51). The National Governance Association has also published helpful guidance clarifying the role of Members in academy trusts.
Over the last 12 to 18 months the DfE has continued to develop its policy in respect of Members. Firstly, it has focused on ensuring a significant degree of separation between the Members and the Board. More recently, the DfE has also focussed on Members’ powers. For example, we are aware of circumstances where the DfE has written to Members reminding them of their role in the effective governance of the trust and their powers. In one such letter it included “These powers enable members to take direct action to secure effective governance.”
With the growing prominence of the role of Members there is also growing interest in their duties.
Academy trusts are exempt charities and therefore it is helpful to reflect on charity law. In some ways, the lack of clarity around Members’ role and duties reflects the broader charity sector. In a recent Court of Appeal judgement it acknowledged:
“Charity law having to a great extent been developed in the context of charitable trusts rather than charitable corporations, it is not always clear how its principles apply to the latter. … The present appeal similarly stems from features of [the trust] which would not exist if it were a charitable trust: the existence of members distinct from its directors (or “trustees”)…”
The Charity Commission issued guidance in 2004 (called RS7 - Membership Charities) which stated “The Charity Commission takes the view that members have an obligation to use their rights and exercise their vote in the best interests of the charity for which they are a member.” The legal basis for this was the Commission’s view that the rights “that exist in relation to the administration of a charitable institution are fiduciary”. Whilst broadly welcomed at the time there was a question as to whether a court would uphold this interpretation. The guidance itself acknowledged “Some uncertainty does exist, however, about the extent to which members of charitable companies are legally obliged to vote in the best interests of the charity of which they are a member. It has been argued that the members of charitable companies are in the same position legally as the members of non-charitable companies.”
An article written by the Head of Legal Policy and Litigation at the Charity Commission, on members' duty to further the charitable purpose in February 2014 shows that the uncertainty remained. This is interesting because in the Charities Act 2011 a statutory duty was included for members of charitable incorporated organisations (CIOs). CIOs, a new type of charitable organisation) were created by the Charities Act 2006 but their introduction was delayed until January 2013. It appears that the opportunity to legislate to clarify this point for CIOs was spotted and taken. Section 220 states:
“Each member of a CIO must exercise the powers that the member has in that capacity in the way that the member decides, in good faith, would be most likely to further the purposes of the CIO.”
The Court of Appeal (Lehtimäki v The Children's Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF)) last year appeared to support the Charity Commission’s long held view and held that a member was a fiduciary and owed equivalent duties to members of a CIO. The Court was clear to confine its judgement to the facts and declined to give guidance as to whether members of other charities would similarly have fiduciary duties. Unfortunately, it also did not rule on the extent of the fiduciary duties. When you take into account the power that was in question in this case (a power to approve/veto a disposition of trust assets to another charity associated with one of the directors) the rationale for the Court’s ruling seems very clear.
Whilst this judgment does not categorically answer the point for academy trusts it does provide helpful guidance. The first question to ask is, for what purpose have Members of academy trusts acquired their rights and powers? If it is for the interests of the academy trust and/or its beneficiaries (e.g to promote effective governance) then that would indicate a fiduciary relationship. Where there is a there is a fiduciary power there will be a corresponding fiduciary duty.
At this point it is also worth noting that many academy trusts will have adopted the DfE’s model Articles which a number of years were updated to include at Article 16A (this is clearly different than the duty on CIO members):
“In exercising their rights under these Articles and the Companies Act 2006, the Members shall not do anything or take any action which would cause the Academy Trust to contravene its Objects.”
We recommend that trusts consider as a minimum putting in place a letter of appointment for Members. The letter could, amongst other things, set out the nature of the role and the required level of commitment. It would also provide an opportunity to include a statement to reflect the Charity Commission’s view where Members agree to exercise their powers as a member in the way that they decide, in good faith, would be most likely to further the objects of the trust.
+44 (0)121 237 4564
You may be interested in...
The Online Safety Bill – what does it mean for schools?
Fit for purpose contracting - April 2023 cohort
In Person Event
MAT Development roadshows
In Person Event
MAT Governance Conference
Changes to the SEND and Alternative Provision framework
New report highlights risk of sidelining ED&I in school trusts
New guidance: understanding academy trusts
be prepared for the 2022-23 academic year
Wellbeing and financial considerations – practical solutions for challenging times
be connected - Spring 2023
Teacher strikes – lessons learnt so far
New support launched to manage school complaints
Cyber security and data breaches
#EdCon2023 virtual event hailed a success
Flexible working in schools webinar
What does the new Provider Access Legislation mean for schools?
High Court dismisses Welsh RSE right to withdraw claim
Term-time school worker entitled to national minimum wage for unworked basic hours
Industrial action essentials: what you need to know
Education Software Solutions Limited breaks against the CMA’s intervention: A victory for freedom and flexibility in contracting for MIS services
Safeguarding at scale report published
Trade unions announce plans to re-ballot members
Widespread industrial action now confirmed for schools
Industrial action and minimum service levels within education
Consultation on holiday entitlement – part-year and irregular workers
FAQs - converting to academy status
FAQs - becoming a sponsored academy
FAQs - becoming an academy sponsor
FAQs – single academy joining a MAT
EdCon2023 launch: Thursday 12 January
Teacher Pay Survey 2022
The Schools Bill – law no moreIn July, we published an update on the Schools Bill with the news that the proposed legislation relating to new academy standards and extended intervention powers for academy trusts would be removed. Last week, we received broader news of the dropping of the Bill, with education secretary Gillian Keegan announcing that it will not reach its third reading in the House of Lords.
be connected newsletter for schools - Winter 2022
Recruiting school staff on a budget – top tips
Regardless of the outcome of ballots on industrial action, unless there is drastic change to funding for schools in relation to pay increases, it will be unusual to find any organisational budget that is not impacted by the current economic situation.
Good governance essential to avoid falling foul of the ESFA
There’s been little evidence of interventions or financial management reviews this year and it appears the Education and Skills Funding Agency (ESFA) has re-focussed on financial delivery. It’s also telling that there were no discernible changes to the reporting of financial irregularities in the Academies Trust Handbook 2022.
Children's commissioner recommendations for SEND reform
The Children’s Commissioner, Rachel De Souza, has recently published a report “Beyond the labels: a SEND system which works for every child, every time”, which she intends to sit alongside the DfE’s SEND Review (2019) and SEND Green Paper (2022) and which she hopes will put children’s voices at the heart of the government’s review of SEND system.
Top three training topics 2022-23
As well as providing day-to-day support to help you focus on managing your settings, we also provide training and professional development on a range of topics to keep you and your staff up-to-date.
Hair discrimination – stop pupils being unfairly singled-out for their appearance
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHCR) recently issued new, non-statutory guidance regarding the wearing of natural or protective hairstyles, specifically in reference to their representation in uniform, behaviour or standalone appearance policies.
The role of benchmarking in setting pay in schools
Emma Hughes, head of HR services at Browne Jacobson, explains how CST’s updated executive pay report and the linked benchmarking service from XpertHR can help trust boards make robust decisions on pay.
School complaint management - exploring a new way forward
There’s greater opportunity than ever for parents, carers and guardians to voice any concerns they have relating to their child’s education and for their concerns to be heard and to be taken seriously. While most staff in schools and academies are conscious of their legal duties relating to complaints management, many are struggling to cope with such a significant increase in the volume of complaints they must manage.