High Court rebuffs woman's bid to marry in Church of Scientology

Mr Pickles said the Church of Scientology might have been entitled to "tax breaks" – because of rules governing places of public worship – had a decision gone in its favour.

He welcomed Mr Justice Ouseley's ruling and said taxpayers would not want "such a controversial organisation" to get "special" treatment.

Scientologist Louisa Hodkin wanted to marry fiancé Alessandro Calcioli in a Church of Scientology chapel in central London.

But Mr Justice Ouseley today said the couple could not marry in the London Church Chapel, in Queen Victoria Street, because it was not legally a "place of meeting for religious worship".

Officials at the Department for Communities and Local Government said places of public worship could be exempted from paying business tax rates.

And Mr Pickles, Conservative MP for Brentwood and Ongar, added: "I welcome this ruling.

"Tolerance and freedom of expression are important British values, but this does not mean that the likes of Church of Scientology deserve favoured tax treatment."

He said the Church of Scientology was not a registered charity and went on: "The majority of the public would not want their own council to be giving special tax breaks to such a controversial organisation."

Mr Justice Ouseley ruled today after hearing legal argument at a High Court hearing in London in October.

He was told that Miss Hodkin launched a challenge after the registrar general of births, deaths and marriages refused to register the London Church Chapel for the solemnisation of marriages under the 1855 Places of Worship Registration Act – because it was not a place for "religious worship".

The judge said the issue had been considered by the Court of Appeal in 1970. He said appeal judges had decided that Scientology services "did not involve acts of worship" – and he said he was bound by that decision. He said he therefore had to dismiss Miss Hodkin's challenge.

But he said the Supreme Court justices – the most senior judges in the UK – should consider the question of whether Scientologists worshipped and decide whether they wanted to rule on the issue.

He said, because the Supreme Court was a more senior court than the Court of Appeal, Supreme Court justices might take a different view and not feel bound by the 1970 ruling.

Miss Hodkin, 24, who, like her fiancé, is a volunteer at the London Church Chapel, said she was pleased that the Supreme Court had been asked to consider the case.

"I knew I would have to be strong and patient given the current law," she said.

"I am delighted that the court has granted me the opportunity to ask the Supreme Court to hear my case.

"I hope that the court allows me to marry in my own church, surrounded by my family and friends, which means everything to me."

Miss Hodkin had argued that the 1970 ruling should not be binding on any court because Scientologist beliefs and services had evolved during the past 42 years.

She said services were "ones of religious worship" and likened Scientology to Buddhism and Jainism.

Her solicitor, Paul Hewitt, who works for law firm Withers, said: "It has always felt wrong that, simply because she is a member of the Church of Scientology, Louisa has been denied the right given to Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Jains and other faiths to have a legal marriage ceremony in accordance with her own religious beliefs and in her own church."

He added: "She needs to overcome the legal barrier of a judgment from 1970, in a very different era."