THE MEANING OF “RELIGION” AND THE ROLE OF THE COURTS IN THE ADJUDICATION OF RELIGIOUS MATTERS: AN ENGLISH AND CANADIAN COMPARISON

Abstract

The recent decisions from the UK Supreme Court, R (Hodkin) v Registrar General and Shergill v Khaira, considered questions with which Canadian courts continue to wrestle about the meaning of “religion” and the extent to which courts should become involved in adjudicating matters which are “religious” in the context of internal disputes. This article compares and contrasts both British and Canadian cases and suggests some general principles for adjudication flowing from them.