R v Registrar General ex parte Segerdal and another was a court case heard by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales, which was instrumental in determining whether the Church of Scientology was to be considered a bona fide religion in England and Wales, and by extension what defines a religion in English law. The case, heard in 1969–70, focused on the question of whether a chapel at the Scientologists' UK headquarters should be registered as a meeting place for religious worship under an 1855 law. The Church's initial application was refused and it appealed the case to the courts, arguing that Scientology was a genuine religion and that it used the chapel for religious purposes. In dismissing the appeal, the Court of Appeal found that Scientology's practices "did not reveal any form whatever of worship".[1] Ten years later, the Segerdal ruling was drawn upon to define a religion for the purposes of English common law as requiring "faith in a god and worship of that god".[2] The Segerdal ruling was later overturned by the Supreme Court in 2013 who redefined the term "religion" in a modern context and ruled that Scientology is to be recognised as a religion in the UK.[3]
The case arose from a bid in 1967 by the Church of Scientology of California to have its "chapel" at Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead registered as a place of worship under the Places of Worship Registration Act 1855. Such a status would convey tax benefits and other advantages.[1] The move followed the worldwide publicity that accompanied the 1965 publication of the Anderson Report, a highly condemnatory report into the practices and effects of Scientology in Victoria, Australia. As Sir John Foster later noted in a British official report on Scientology, prior to the publication of the Anderson Report little serious effort was made to present Scientology as a religion. Following the report, however, the leadership of the Church of Scientology made a concerted effort to present Scientology as having a religious character. Scientology was now described as "an applied "religious" philosophy, processing as a "religious" technology, auditors as "Scientology Ministers", auditing as "Confessionals", and so on."[4] In an HCO Executive Letter of 12 March 1966 the founder of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, informed Scientologists that a new corporate structure was being set up using the Church of Scientology of California as a vehicle. Scientology "auditors" would be presented as ministers of religion, as "ministers have in many places special privileges including tax and housing allowances" and "Parliaments don't attack religions".[5]
At the start of 1967 the church and its acting chaplain, Michael Segerdal, submitted a request to the Registrar General for the chapel to be registered under the 1855 Act. The Registrar General made enquiries following the application and was sent booklets titled Ceremonies of the Founding Church of Scientology and Scientology and the Bible. He turned down the application as he did not believe that Scientology qualified as a religion.[1]
Judgment
Queen's Bench hearing
The Royal Courts of Justice, where the case was heard
In response, Segerdal and the Church brought an application for a writ of mandamus – essentially a request to overrule the Registrar General – to the Queen's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice in London. The case was heard by a panel of three judges: Lord Parker, the Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Ashworth and Mr Justice Cantley. In its ruling, issued on 14 November 1969, the court dismissed the application with costs awarded against the plaintiffs. Justice Ashworth commented: "While Scientology may be wholly admirable, I find it difficult to reach the conclusion that it is a religion."[6]
The plaintiffs' contention that Scientology was a bona fide religion was supported by the two booklets on Scientology's "creeds". Scientology and the Bible contended that "Scientology is a religion in the oldest sense of the word, a study of wisdom. Scientology is a study of man as a spirit, in his relationship to life and the physical universe. It is non-denominational. By that is meant that Scientology is open to people from all religious beliefs and in no way tries to persuade a person from his religion, but assists him to better understanding as a spiritual being." Justice Ashworth commented that this formulation did not seem to support at all the assertion that Scientology was a religion; rather, it came across more as "a meeting point for persons of all religious beliefs, through which they might better appreciate their spiritual character."[6]
The central issue in the case was whether the chapel was "a place of meeting for religious worship", as required by the 1855 Act. In support of the application, Segerdal described in an affidavit how the chapel was used. He told the court that "Sunday services" were held there at which the chaplain addressed a congregation and delivered a sermon on aspects of Scientology, possibly accompanied by a taped lecture from L. Ron Hubbard. It was followed by a short period for quiet contemplation or prayer and concluded with announcements of things happening in the forthcoming week. Segerdal also stated that other religious activities were conducted there such as christening or naming ceremonies, funeral services and wedding services.[6]
The court ruled that for worship to take place, there had to be "both a worshipper and an object of worship." For it to be religious worship, it had to be associated with a bona fide religion. This was a problem for Scientology, as its religious status was controversial and unclear.[6] The court found that the evidence did not support Scientology's claims of religious status, nor did its practices amount to religious worship. The services described by Segerdal were better described as services of instruction rather than worship.[6]
Court of Appeal
The case was appealed to the Court of Appeal, where it was heard by Lord Denning, the Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Winn and Lord Justice Buckley. Counsel for the Scientologists argued that the Registrar General was obliged to accept certifications of a place's use for religious worship, but the court rejected this proposition. Lord Denning found that the Registrar General was obliged to determine whether a place was truly being used for religious worship, as it would lead to abuses if he merely "rubber-stamped" such applications.[1]
The court debated what "religious worship" meant but identified the phrase "place of meeting for religious worship" in the 1855 Act as being the key issue. To Lord Denning's mind, this meant "a place of which the principal use was as a place where people came together as a congregation to do reverence" to a deity, whether it was the Christian God or some other. The judges agreed that Scientology's practices "did not reveal any form whatever of worship. [Scientologists] did not humble themselves in reverence or recognition of the dominant power and control of any entity or being outside their own bodies and life."[1] As Lord Denning put it, "There is considerable stress on the spirit of Man, and adherents of this religion or philosophy believe that a man's spirit is everlasting and moves from one human frame to another. But it is still, as far as I can see, the spirit of Man and not God." The court found that there was no evidence of religious worship taking place in the chapel and dismissed the appeal. Permission to appeal to the House of Lords was refused.[7]
Significance
The Segerdal case has continued to have relevance for many years since it was heard in 1969–70. In 1974, the Immigration Appeal Tribunal relied upon Segerdal in ruling that Scientologists could not take advantage of the privileges given in immigration law to ministers of religion.[8]
The Segerdal ruling was heavily relied upon in 1980 to put forward a definition of religion in the case Re South Place Ethical Society. The Society, which proclaimed itself to be concerned with "the study and dissemination of ethical principles and the cultivation of a rational religious sentiment", had applied for charitable status for the purpose of advancement of religion. Justice Dillon drew on the Segerdal case's comments on what constituted a religion and observed: "Religion, as I see it, is concerned with man's relations with God, and ethics are concerned with man's relations with man. The two are not the same, and are not made the same by sincere inquiry into the question: what is God?" Dillon defined religion as requiring "faith in a god and worship of that god".[2]
Dillon's definition and the Segerdal findings were of key importance in 1999 when the Charity Commission decided to reject the Church of Scientology's application for charitable status. The Commission held that the Church was not established for the advancement of religion because although "it is accepted that Scientology believes in a supreme being," the "core practices of Scientology, being auditing and training, do not constitute worship as they do not display the essential characteristic of reverence or veneration for a supreme being."[2]
The Segerdal definition of "a place of religious worship" still applies to registrations of such places. The court found that in order to be registered, the principal use of the place would have to be religious, regardless of how heavily (or little) it was used for that purpose. As Julian Rivers points out, the law "assumes that religious and non-religious uses are easy to disentangle", which may not always be the case.[9]
A thirty-year retrospective on Segerdal can be found in Chapter 5 of the first report of the Select Committee on Religious Offences in England and Wales.[10]
Supreme Court decision 2013
On 11 December 2013, the Supreme Court in the UK overruled Segerdal in R (on the application of Hodkin and another) v Registrar General of Births, Deaths and Marriages.[11]
In the Supreme Court's judgement, it established a new legal definition for religion as "a spiritual or non-secular belief system, held by a group of adherents, which claims to explain mankind’s place in the universe and relationship with the infinite, and to teach its adherents how they are to live their lives in conformity with the spiritual understanding associated with the belief system." Lord Toulson concluded that Scientology would meet that definition of a religion in the UK and subsequently ordered the Registrar General to recognize the Chapel at the Church of Scientology in London as a place of worship and as a place for the solemnisation of marriages under section 41(1) of the Marriage Act.[12]
The Church of Scientology has been involved in court disputes in several countries. In some cases, when the Church has initiated the dispute, questions have been raised as to its motives. The Church of Scientology says that its use of the legal system is necessary to protect its intellectual property and its right to freedom of religion. Critics say that most of the organization's legal claims are designed to harass those who criticize it and its manipulative business practices.
The Church of Scientology maintains a wide variety of beliefs and practices. The core belief holds that a human is an immortal, spiritual being (thetan) that is resident in a physical body. The thetan has had innumerable past lives, some of which, preceding the thetan's arrival on Earth, were lived in extraterrestrial cultures. Based on case studies at advanced levels, it is predicted that any Scientologist undergoing auditing will eventually come across and recount a common series of past-life events.
The term fair game is used to describe policies and practices carried out by the Church of Scientology towards people and groups it perceives as its enemies. Founder of Scientology, L. Ron Hubbard, established the policy in the 1950s, in response to criticism both from within and outside his organization. Individuals or groups who are "fair game" are judged to be a threat to the Church and, according to the policy, can be punished and harassed using any and all means possible. In 1968, Hubbard officially canceled use of the term "fair game" because of negative public relations it caused, although the Church's aggressive response to criticism continued.
The Church of Scientology is a group of interconnected corporate entities and other organizations devoted to the practice, administration and dissemination of Scientology, which is variously defined as a cult, a business, or a new religious movement. The movement has been the subject of a number of controversies, and the Church of Scientology has been described by government inquiries, international parliamentary bodies, scholars, law lords, and numerous superior court judgements as both a dangerous cult and a manipulative profit-making business. In 1979, several executives of the organization were convicted and imprisoned for multiple offenses by a U.S. Federal Court. The Church of Scientology itself was convicted of fraud by a French court in 2009, a decision upheld by the supreme Court of Cassation in 2013. The German government classifies Scientology as an unconstitutional sect. In France, it has been classified as a dangerous cult. In some countries, it has attained legal recognition as a religion.
Believe What You Like: What happened between the Scientologists and the National Association for Mental Health, written by the New Statesman director C. R. Hewitt under the pen name C. H. Rolph, details a public dispute between the Church of Scientology and the National Association for Mental Health in Britain.
Church of the New Faith was a name used by the Church of Scientology in Australia from 1969 until 1983 to avoid laws that restricted or banned the practice of Scientology.
Scientology and marriage, within the Church of Scientology, are discussed in the book The Background, Ministry, Ceremonies & Sermons of the Scientology Religion.
The Church of Scientology Moscow v Russia [2007] ECHR 258 is a European Court of Human Rights case, concerning Article 11 of the Convention. In the case the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg condemned Moscow City Government's refusal to consider the Church of Scientology of Moscow for registration as a religious organisation, and as a result found that Russia had violated the rights of the Church of Scientology under Articles 11 when "read in the light of Article 9". Specifically, the Court determined that, in denying consideration of registration to the Church of Scientology of Moscow, the Moscow authorities "did not act in good faith and neglected their duty of neutrality and impartiality vis-à-vis the applicant's religious community". The Court also awarded the Church €10,000 in respect of non-pecuniary damage and €15,000 for costs and expenses.
Scientology has existed in Australia since the early 1950s. The number of Scientology adherents varies depending upon the source: according to the Australian Census, it has a declining population: 1,655 members in 2021, down from 1,681 in 2016 and 2,163 in 2011; while Scientology itself has claimed 150,000 members in Australia. It has headquarters in Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide, and Canberra, along with a mission in Tasmania and Brisbane. The Church of Scientology Australia is the regional headquarters for the entire Asian and Pacific area.
Scientology status by country describes the status of Scientology and its recognition as a religion in varying contexts or in different countries. The Church of Scientology pursues an extensive public relations campaign for state recognition of Scientology as a religion.
The relationship between Scientology and religious groups is very complex. While Scientology claims that it is fully compatible with all existing major world religions and that it does not conflict with them or their religious practices, there are significant contradictions between Scientology and most religions, especially the major monotheistic religions. Members are not allowed to engage in other similar mental therapies or procedures, religious or otherwise.
Scientology has operated in Belgium since 1972, but the organization has encountered difficulties there in recent years.
Scientology in the United Kingdom is practised mainly within the Church of Scientology and its related groups which go under names including "Hubbard Academy of Personal Independence" and "Dianetics and Scientology Life Improvement Centre". The national headquarters, and former global headquarters, is Saint Hill Manor at East Grinstead, which for seven years was the home of L. Ron Hubbard, the pulp fiction author who created Scientology. In the 2021 census, there were 1,844 individuals in England and Wales who listed themselves as Scientologists in their census returns, almost half of which lived in the area around East Grinstead in West Sussex, which hosts the British Scientology Headquarters at Saint Hill Manor. This is a decline of just under a quarter since census day, 2011.
The Church of Scientology has operated in Germany since 1970. German authorities estimate that there are 4,000 active Scientologists in Germany as of 2020; the Church of Scientology gives a membership figure of around 12,000. The Church of Scientology has encountered particular antagonism from the German press and government and occupies a precarious legal, social and cultural position in Germany.
The Scientology movement has been present in Canada since at least the 1960s. According to the most recent available census data, there were 1,745 individuals in Canada identifying as Scientologists in 2011. The Scientology organisation has encountered difficulties in obtaining status as a tax exempt organization, as has happened in other countries.
Scientology has been subjected to considerable regulation in Russia.
The Places of Worship Registration Act 1855 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which governs the registration and legal recognition of places of worship. It applies only in England and Wales, and does not cover the Church of England which is exempt from the Act's requirements. Nor does it affect the Church in Wales, which remains part of the Anglican Communion although it is no longer the Established Church in Wales. Registration is not compulsory, but it gives certain financial advantages and is also required before a place of worship can be registered as a venue for marriages.
Hubbard v Vosper, [1972] 2 Q.B. 84, is a leading English copyright law case on the defence of fair dealing. The Church of Scientology sued a former member, Cyril Vosper, for copyright infringement due to the publication of a book, The Mind Benders, criticizing Scientology. The Church of Scientology alleged that the books contained material copied from books and documents written by L. Ron Hubbard, as well as containing confidential information pertaining to Scientology courses. Vosper successfully defended the claim under the fair dealing doctrine, with the Court of Appeal deciding unanimously in his favour. The judgment given by Lord Denning clarified the scope and content of the fair dealing defence.
The tax status of the Church of Scientology in the United States has been the subject of decades of controversy and litigation. Although the Church of Scientology was initially partially exempted by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from paying federal income tax, its two principal entities in the United States lost this exemption in 1957 and 1968. This action was taken because of concerns that church funds were being used for the private gain of its founder L. Ron Hubbard or due to an international psychiatric conspiracy against Scientology.
Church of Atheism of Central Canada v Canada (National Revenue) 2019 FCA 296 (CanLII) is a 2019 Federal Court of Appeal case in Canada. It was brought by the Church of Atheism of Central Canada against the Canada Revenue Agency after the Minister of National Revenue rejected their application for religious charitable status. The court determined on a unanimous verdict that atheism is not a religion and not eligible for tax-exempt charity status.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
