[Foundation-l] Wikimedia UK v2.0

[Thomas Dalton]

On 28/08/2008, Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> I am probably talking out of the top of my head, but as a Pom now living
>  in Australia who vists the UK frequently and hopes to meet up with UK
>  wikimedians on one of these visits, I am concerned about all this.
>
>  I wonder why you want to be a "company limited by guarantee"? Is that
>  the only way. Would the Clapham Common Tiddlywinks Clus be a company
>  limited by guarantee? Or are there simpler processes. Wikimedia
>  Australia Inc is incorporated as an Association in one State (Victoria).
>  This is what clubs and associations do. It is much simpler than being a
>  company of any kind and it still protects the officers and committee
>  members from liability. Is there nothing similar in the UK?

What does "incorporated as an Association" mean? In the UK, an
association is a type of *un*incorporated charity and offers little or
no protection for the board. I take it Australia uses different
terminology. There is a new type of charity in the process of being
designed, a Charitable Incorporated Organisation, which gives you the
advantages of being a company without all the extra paperwork, but
that won't be available for at least 6 months by the look of it. We
can, however, convert to it once it is available - it will apparently
be designed to make conversion quite simple. At the moment, however, a
company limited by guarantee is pretty much the only option that
protects the board.

>  Best wishes from the Oz chapter for a successful rebirth.

Much appreciated, thank you.