Shergill v Khaira
[2014] UKSC 33
Independent editorial summary — not the official judgment. Read the full judgment via the source link.
Ratio Decidendi
The courts can adjudicate on religious disputes where they raise justiciable issues of property or civil rights. The court must identify the relevant religious doctrine and apply it neutrally, without making value judgments about the merits of the doctrine itself.
Facts
A dispute arose within a Sikh religious community about the trusteeship of Gurdwara properties. The trustees claimed the courts could not adjudicate because the underlying issues were religious in nature.
Judgment Summary
The Supreme Court held that the dispute was justiciable. While courts will not adjudicate on matters of pure religious doctrine, they will determine civil rights and property disputes even where this requires identifying what a religious body believes. The court applies the religious rules neutrally as facts, not as legal doctrine.
Key Quotes
"In both jurisdictions the courts do not adjudicate on the truth of religious beliefs or on the validity of particular rites. But where a claimant asks the court to enforce private rights and obligations which depend on religious issues, the judge may have to determine such religious issues as are capable of objective ascertainment."
— Lords Neuberger, Sumption and Hodge at [45](verbatim, verified against the judgment)
Subsequent Treatment
The leading modern authority on justiciability of religious disputes affecting civil rights.
What To Do Next
Get Professional Help