The High Court today ruled that Bideford Town Council acted unlawfully by allowing prayers to be said before meetings.

The test case bid to outlaw prayers before local council meetings was won by the National Secular Society and an atheist councillor.

They challenged the practice of Bideford Town Council of having religious prayers on meeting agendas.

Today Mr Justice Ouseley, sitting in London, ruled: “The saying of prayers as part of the formal meeting of a council is not lawful under section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972, and there is no statutory power permitting the practice to continue.”

The legal challenge was launched in July 2010 after the society was contacted by Clive Bone - a non-believer who was then a Bideford councillor.

Mr Bone later left the council because of its “refusal to adjust” its prayer policy.

In his ruling, the judge said: ``There is no specific power to say prayers or to have any period of quiet reflection as part of the business of the council.''

Referring to Bideford, he said: “The council has on two occasions by a majority voted to retain public prayers at its full meetings.

“But that does not give it power to do what it has no power to do.”

The judge said the council made attendance at prayers optional “because it recognises that councillors, of whatever religion or none, may not wish to attend prayers as part of a political meeting.”

But this turned a council meeting “into a partial gathering of those councillors who share a particular religious outlook, or are indifferent to it or – as in the case of Mr Bone – too embarrassed to leave in public”.

“That cannot satisfy section 111. The same objection does not apply to a few minutes silent reflection on the duties ahead, which each can observe in their own way.”

Following today’s ruling, Clive Bone said: “I am delighted. It shows that the rule of law is to apply. The law was unclear but now it is not. Local authorities do not have the power to conduct prayers.”

Mr Bone said he would have stood for council again had this decision been made a year ago, but said he will be in his 70s the next time around and he feels councils need younger people.

“I hope this will encourage more younger people to stand. I know of people who said they wanted to stand but were put off because of the prayers.

“Councils were sending out the wrong signal. They are dominated by elderly church-goers and the council belong to everyone, not just a few.

“This is a good day for local democracy.”

Society lawyers argued that council members who were not religious were being “indirectly discriminated against”, in breach of human rights laws.

But the case was not won on human rights grounds, but on a point of statutory construction of local government legislation.

In a statement, Bideford Town Council said: "We are surprised and disappointed that the court has decided that the saying of prayers as part of the formal business meeting of local councils is unlawful. However, the court has confirmed that prayers may be said in the council chamber immediately preceding formal business.

"We are very pleased that the court has decided in favour of Bideford that we had not discriminated against Mr Bone nor infringed his human rights and that the practices adopted by the council did not infringe equality legislation.

"We will be speaking to our legal team to consider our options, including whether to appeal. We note that the National Secular Society claim that the majority of councils start their council meeting with prayer."

Simon Calvert, of the Christian Institute, described the ruling as “bizarre”.

He said: “We are pleased that the court has said the saying of prayers at meetings does not breach human rights laws – but it is bizarre that they should be declared unlawful because of the 1972 Local Government Act.”

The judge said it was not for the court “to rule upon the likelihood of divine guidance” becoming available to council members through prayer.

Then he added: “I do not think that the 1972 Act dealing with the organisation, management and decision-making of local councils should be interpreted as permitting the religious views of one group of councillors, however sincere or large its number, to exclude or, even to a modest extent, impose burdens on or mark out those who do not share their views and do not wish to participate in their expression.

“They are all equally-elected councillors.”

Related:

DISCUSSION: Do you agree with the ruling? Share your thoughts

High Court set to rule on council prayers

Council prayer row goes to High Court

Minister backs council prayers before meetings

Council faces legal action over prayers at meetings

Echoes of town council's prayers row in the Lords

Claim council prayers are 'discriminatory'

Prayers help council 'make best decision'

Council say prayers, but was it the last time?