Church in UK Law

There is only one further point. He argued that the Temple itself would be a church hall, chapel hall or similar building used in connection with the chapels, and therefore qualifying for exemption under (b). The short answer is that this Temple is not a church hall, chapel hall, nor a similar building. It is not in the least on the same footing as a church hall or chapel hall. It is a very sacred sanctuary, quite different from a building of that category.

I consider that there is a distinction between private or domestic or family worship on the one hand and public religious worship on the other. In my view the conception of public religious worship involves the coming together for corporate worship of a congregation or meeting or assembly of people, but I think that it further involves that the worship is in a place which is open to all properly disposed persons who wish to be present.

For this purpose the admission of the public means, I think, the admission of those members of the public who are reasonably suitable, who come in reverence not mockery, and who are prepared to behave in reasonable conformity to the requirements of the religion which they are visiting, for example, by covering their heads where that is required, or by removing their shoes on entering a mosque.

Furthermore, it is less likely on general grounds that Parliament intended to give exemption to religious services that exclude the public since exemptions from rating, though not necessarily consistent, show a general pattern of intention to benefit those activities which are for the good of the general public. All religious services that open their doors to the public may, in an age of religious tolerance, claim to perform some spiritual service to the general public.

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 may be another God, or an unknown God, but it must be reverence to a deity. For instance, Buddhist temples are properly described as places of meeting for religious worship.

Next with regard to registration requirements on moving to another area, it is clear from reading the CIPU report in conjunction with Dr Chenciner's report and its appendices, that although the old Soviet propiska system has officially been abolished in Ukraine, something very similar to it is still in place. Moreover the registration is not computer based at a national level but depends upon local records.