Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T19:30:33.686Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Recent Developments in Religious Liberty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2008

Ian Leigh
Ian Leigh*
Affiliation:
Professor of Law, Human Rights Centre, Durham Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This is the first in what is intended as a series of comments on current developments in the law concerning freedom of religion that will appear regularly in this Journal. This first survey deals with religious liberty challenges brought in the UK courts in 2007 and 2008. A subsequent survey will examine similar developments in international human rights law and especially before the European Court of Human Rights.

Type
Comment
Information
Ecclesiastical Law Journal , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 65 - 72
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical Law Society 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Arrowsmith v United Kingdom Application 7050/75 (1978).

2 R (SB) v Governors of Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15 [2007] 1 AC 100, para 50.

3 See generally Hill, M and Sandberg, R, ‘Is nothing sacred? Clashing symbols in a secular world’ (2007) Public Law 488–506 Google Scholar.

4 [2007] EWHC 298 (Admin), available at <http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2007/298.html>, accessed 13 October 2008.

5 R (On the application of X) v The Headteacher of Y School, [2007] EWHC 298 (Admin), available at <http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2007/298.html>, accessed 13 October 2008, para 38.

6 [2007] EWHC 1698. See also (2008) 10 Ecc LJ 130–131.

7 [2008] EWHC 1865 (Admin). See also the case note on pp 126–127 of this issue.

8 R (on the application of Suryanda) v Welsh Ministers [2007] EWHC 1376 (Admin). See the note at (2008) 10 Ecc LJ 127–129.

9 Ibid, para 97.

10 R (on the application of Suryanda) v Welsh Ministers [2007] EWCA Civ 893; also noted at (2008) 10 Ecc LJ 127–129.

11 See R (SB) v Governors of Denbigh High School [2007] 1 AC 100, per Lord Hoffmann at para 68.

12 Green v The City of Westminster Magistrates' Court [2007] EWHC (Admin) 2785. See also (2008) 10 Ecc LJ 254.

13 Ahdar, R and Leigh, I, Religious Freedom in the Liberal State (Oxford, 2005), ch. 10CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 Gay News Ltd v United Kingdom (1983) 5 EHRR, 123; Choudhury v United Kingdom (1991) 12 HRLJ 172; Wingrove v United Kingdom (1997) 24 EHRR 1.

15 Otto-Preminger Institute v Austria (1995) 19 EHRR 34.

16 IA v Turkey (2007) 45 EHRR 30.

17 Green v The City of Westminster Magistrates' Court.

18 Doe, N and Sandberg, R., ‘The strange death of blasphemy’, (2008) 71 Modern Law Review 971 Google Scholar.

19 A Jeremy, ‘Practical implications of the enactment of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006’, (2007) 9 Ecc LJ 187; J Oliva, ‘The legal protection of believers and beliefs in the United Kingdom’, (2007) 9 Ecc LJ 66.

20 Giniewski v France, Appl 64016/00, judgment of 31 January 2006; Klein v Slovakia, Appl No 722208/01, judgment of 31 October 2006; ECtHR (2nd section), Aydin Tatlav v Turkey, 2 May 2006.

21 [2008] UKHL 56, noted on pp 125–126 of this issue. See also R Sandberg ‘Underrating human rights: Gallagher v Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’, on pp 75–80 of this issue.

22 Gallagher (Valuation Officer) v Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, para 13.

23 Ibid, para 31.

24 Ibid, paras 49–51.

25 See Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints v Henning (Valuation Officer) [1964] AC 420.

26 See Charities Act 2006, Part I and Charity Commission, Public Benefit and the Advancement of Religion (2008), available at <http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/Library/publicbenefit/pdfs/pbarsum.pdf>, accessed 13 October 2008.

27 [2007] 1 WLR 693, [2006] EWHC 823 (Admin).

28 See paras 109–150.

29 [2007] EWCA Civ 478, [2008] QB 143, discussed in the Editorial of this Journal at (2007) 9 Ecc LJ 247.

30 R (on the application of Baiai) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2008] UK HL 53, noted on pp 124–125 of this issue.