swarb.co.uk - law index
These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.
Ecclesiastical - From: 1970 To: 1979
This page lists 16 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.
Regina v Registrar General, Ex parte Segerdal [1970] 2 QB 697
1970
CA
Lord Denning MR, Winn and Buckley LJJ
Family, Administrative, Ecclesiastical
The Church of Scientology chapel at East Grinstead, Sussex was not a "place of meeting for religious worship" within the meaning of section 2 of the 1855 Act since that would require reverence to a deity. The Church of Scientology's services did not meet that test, and a valid ceremony of marriage could not be conducted there. The question of whether the services performed in the chapel are properly to be regarded as a form of religious worship is inevitably conditioned by whether Scientology is to be regarded as a religion.
Lord Denning asked whether the chapel was a place of meeting for religious worship within the meaning of the Act, saying: "We have had much discussion on the meaning of the word "religion" and of the word "worship", taken separately, but I think we should take the combined phrase, "place of meeting for religious worship" as used in the statute of 1855. It connotes to my mind a place of which the principal use is as a place where people come together as a congregation or assembly to do reverence to God. It need not be the God which the Christians worship. It may be another God, or an unknown God, but it must be reverence to a deity. There may be exceptions. For instance, Buddhist temples are properly described as places of meeting for religious worship. But, apart from exceptional cases of that kind, it seems to me the governing idea behind the words "place of meeting for religious worship" is that it should be a place for the worship of God. I am sure that would be the meaning attached by those who framed this legislation of 1855."
As to how that might apply to the Church of Scientology: "Turning to the creed of the Church of Scientology, I must say that it seems to me to be more a philosophy of the existence of man or of life, rather than a religion. Religious worship means reverence or veneration of God or of a Supreme Being. I do not find any such reverence or veneration in the creed of this church . . When I look through the ceremonies and the affidavits, I am left with the feeling that there is nothing in it of reverence for God or a deity, but simply instruction in a philosophy. There may be belief in a spirit of man, but there is no belief in a spirit of God."
Winn LJ said that he did not feel well qualified to discuss whether Scientology could properly be called a religion, but the evidence did not show to his mind that its adherents observed any form of worship. He explained what he meant by worship: "by no "worship", if I am bound to define my terms, I mean to indicate that they do not humble themselves in reverence and recognition of the dominant power and control of any entity or being outside their own body and life."
Buckley LJ said: "Worship I take to be something which must have some at least of the following characteristics: submission to the object worshipped, veneration of that object, praise, thanksgiving, prayer or intercession."
Places of Worship Registration Act 1855 2
1 Cites
1 Citers
Welsh v United States; 15-Jun-1970 - 398 US 333 (1970); [1970] USSC 147; 90 SCt 1792; 26 Led 2d 308
In Re St Peter's, Bushey Heath [1971] 1 WLR 357
26 Oct 1970
Conc
G. H. Newsom Q.C.
Ecclesiastical, Land
cw Ecclesiastical Law - Faculty - Secular purpose - Use of unconsecrated curtilage of church - Jurisdiction to grant faculty
A faculty was sought for the grant of a right of way easement over unconsecrated land, but within the curtilage of the church. Held: Such an easement could be granted, but the land itself must remain the property of the incumbent. Private rights of way should be granted only after full and open argument. The only way to grant an easement over consecrated land is through an Act of parliament or a church measure.
1 Cites
[ lip ]
Violet Maud Spencer (Pastoral Measure) v The Church Commissioners (Jcpc) [1970] UKPC 33
7 Dec 1970
PC
Ecclesiastical
[ Bailii ]
Barker v O'Gorman; ChD 1971 - [1971] Ch 215
In re Saint Gregory's, Tredington [1972] Fam 236
1972
Carc
Ecclesiastical
The court formulated guidelines when considering the disposal of chattels by a church. The court should consider i) any strong liturgical, historical or architectural connection with the church ii) that any flouting of the donor's wishes might deter other donors.
1 Citers
Elphick v The Church Commissioners [1974] AC 562; [1974] 2 WLR 756
1974
PC
Dipock, Cross of Chealsea, Kilbrandon LL
Ecclesiastical
The appellants challenged an order declaring a local church redundant, saying the procedure had not been followed. Held: Under section 8 the Committee could consider de novo any scheme submitted to them, but would only reluctantly depart from a decision of the Pastoral Committee. The appellants would have to show sufficient proper objection. On the facts of this case there was no such sufficient reason.
Pastoral Measures Act 1968 8(4)
1 Citers
X v The United Kingdom; ECHR 20-Dec-1974 - 5442/72
Gibson v Lord Advocate 1975 SC 136
1975
Lord Keith
Scotland, Ecclesiastical, Constitutional
Lord Keith reserved his opinion on whether provisions in the Acts of Union of 1707 and legislation purporting to abolish the Church of Scotland were justiciable.
1 Citers
W. J. Gant (Pastoral Measure 1968) v The Church Commissioners (Jcpc); PC 20-May-1976 - [1976] UKPC 15
J. Lumley and Others (Pastoral Measure 1968) v The Church Commissioners; PC 15-Nov-1976 - [1976] UKPC 28
Malnak v Yogi; 2-Feb-1979 -
Whitehouse v Lemon; Whitehouse v Gay News Ltd [1979] 2 WLR 281; [1979] AC 617
21 Feb 1979
HL
Lord Diplock, Viscount Dilhorne, Lord Edmund-Davies, Lord Russell of Killowen and Lord Scarman
Defamation, Crime, Ecclesiastical
The appellants challenged their conviction for blasphemous libel. They had published a poem which described homosexual acts carried out on the body of Christ after his death. Held: For a conviction, it was necessary to show that the defendant had published the material, and that it was of the necessary character, namely that it vilified Christ in his life and crucifixion. It was not necessary to show that the defendant intended the blasphemy. A blasphemous libel is a publication of material calculated to shock or outrage the feelings of Christians. There is no need to show additionally a tendency to cause a breach of the peace.
Lord Scarman gave the rationale for the existence of an offence of blasphemy: "I do not subscribe to the view that the common law offence of blasphemous libel serves no useful purpose in the modern law. On the contrary, I think there is a case for legislation extending it to protect the religious beliefs and feelings of non-Christians. The offence belongs to a group of criminal offences designed to safeguard the internal tranquillity of the kingdom. In an increasingly plural society such as that of modern Britain it is necessary not only to respect the differing religious beliefs, feelings and practices of all but also to protect them from scurrility, vilification, ridicule and contempt . . I will not lend my voice to a view of the law relating to blasphemous libel which would render it a dead letter, or diminish its efficacy to protect religious feelings from outrage and insult"
1 Cites
1 Citers
[ lip ]
Church of Scientology v Sweden; ECHR 5-May-1979 - 7805/77; [1979] ECHR 9
Reformation Church Trust (Pastoral Measure) v The Church Commissioners; PC 27-Jul-1979 - [1979] UKPC 35
Mackenzie (Pastoral Measure) v The Church Commissioners; PC 27-Jul-1979 -
