 In "Dingle v Turner", a charitable trust was established to help poor employees of Dingle & Co.While the beneficiaries were all linked by a personal relationship (their employer), the courts ruled that poverty is an exception to the "Oppenheim" rule.Academics Richard Edwards and Nigel Stockwell argue that this is because allowing such trusts to exist relieves the rest of society for having to provide for poor people; as a result, there is "public benefit" in a wider way.