The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS) appealed against the decision that buildings (including a temple) on one of its sites did not qualify for the non-domestic rating exemption under Schedule 5 of the Local Government Finance Act 1988. The principle issues in the appeal were:
-
i. Whether the temple was a ‘place of public religious worship’ for the purposes of the 1988 Act (and therefore entitled to the exemption); and
-
ii. Whether the exclusion of the temple from such relief amounted to indirect discrimination in breach of Articles 9 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The House dismissed the appeal, finding that the first issue had already been determined against the LDS by its earlier decision in Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints v Henning [1964] AC 420. There was no reason to suggest that Parliament intended the wording of the 1988 Act to hold a different meaning from the terms of its statutory predecessor under consideration in Henning. The temple was not a place of public religious worship as it was not open to the public but only to those members of the LDS who had obtained the relevant ‘recommend’. Further, the majority of the House held that the exclusion of the temple from such relief did not amount to indirect discrimination as alleged. The rating liability of the temple would not prevent members of the LDS from manifesting their religion. The LDS was not taxed on account of its religion; rather its doctrine and polity prevented it from providing the public benefit necessary to secure a tax advantage. Lord Scott of Foscote expressed doubt about this conclusion but the House unanimously held that, if there was any indirect discrimination, that it was justifiable as being within the margin of appreciation available to individual signatory states under the Convention. [RA]
For a critique of this decision, see R Sandberg, ‘Underrating human rights: Gallagher v Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ on pages 75–80 of this issue.
