R v Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Great Britain ex parte Wachmann [1992] 1 WLR 1036, EWHC

Citation:R v Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Great Britain ex parte Wachmann [1992] 1 WLR 1036, EWHC

Rule of thumb 1:What is the basic test for a Judicial review? It has to relate to a question over how a core aspect of Government should function.

Rule of thumb 2:Can a person who is ousted from a role in an association, such as a Church, raise a Judicial Review of the decision? No, although seem associations do have high societal importance, this is still a private matter which have to be raised in civil Court.

Background facts:

Parties argued:

Judgment:

It has long been understood that it is not the business of the courts to intervene in matters of religion. In R v Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of Great Britain and the Commonwealth, ex p Wachmann [1992] 1 WLR 1036, 1042-1043, Simon Brown J observed that the court was hardly in a position to regulate what was essentially a religious function – in that case, the determination whether someone was morally and religiously fit to carry out the spiritual and pastoral duties of his office. As he put it, the court must inevitably be wary of entering so self-evidently sensitive an area, straying across the well-recognised divide between church and state.

Ratio-decidendi:

'There must be ‘not merely a public but potentially a governmental interest in the decision-making power in question.’ at page 1046 Brown LJ

centered image

Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.