A Muslim student at a high-achieving school in north London, once dubbed Britain’s strictest, has lost a High Court challenge against its ban on “prayer rituals”.
The pupil, who cannot be named, took legal action against Michaela Community School in Brent, claiming that the policy is discriminatory and “uniquely” affects her faith due to its ritualised nature.
But in a written ruling on Tuesday, Mr Justice Linden dismissed the pupil’s arguments, with the outcome hailed as a “victory for all schools” by the headteacher Katharine Birbalsingh, a former government social mobility tsar.
The school had argued its policy was justified after it faced death and bomb threats linked to religious observance on site.
Ms Birbalsingh said: “A school should be free to do what is right for the pupils it serves,” she said.
“The court’s decision is therefore a victory for all schools. Schools should not be forced by one child and her mother to change its approach simply because they have decided they don’t like something at the school.”
The pupil who brought the legal challenge said in a statement provided by law firm Simpson Millar that she was disappointed by the result but that she felt she did the right thing challenging the ban in the first place.
“I am obviously very disappointed that the judge did not agree with me,” she said. “As is set out in the judgement, I do not agree that it would be too hard for the school to accommodate pupils who wished to pray in the lunch break.
“The school is very well run and generally very good at managing everything. The school doesn’t wish to allow pupils to pray, has chosen a different path and the judge has found in their favour.
“Even though I lost, I still feel that I did the right thing in seeking to challenge the ban. I tried my best and was true to myself and my religion.
“Being involved in this case has not been easy for me … The teachers are very good here and I hope to do the best that I can. I am also grateful for the understanding that my non-Muslim friends at school have shown as to the issues that affect us.”
The case will be seen as upholding the right of non-religious schools to make their own decision about whether to set aside time and space for pupils to pray.
Education Secretary Gillian Keegan described Michaela as an “outstanding school”. “I hope this judgment gives all school leaders the confidence to make the right decisions for their pupils,” she said. “I have always been clear that headteachers are best placed to make decisions in their school.”
The pupil argued that the policy – that forbids her from praying for around five minutes at lunch time, on dates when faith rules required it, but not during lessons – was “the kind of discrimination which makes religious minorities feel alienated from society”.
The pupil’s lawyers previously said the “prayer ban” unlawfully breached her right to religious freedom, adding that it made her feel “like somebody saying they don’t feel like I properly belong here”. The court was told the pupil, referred to only as TTT, is making only a “modest” request to be allowed to pray at lunchtime.
The student also challenged allegedly unfair decisions to temporarily suspend her from school.
Mr Justice Linden, who heard the case at the High Court in London in January, said there was a “a rational connection between the aim of promoting the team ethos of the school, inclusivity, social cohesion etc and the prayer ritual policy”.
He said: “The disadvantage to Muslim pupils at the school caused by the prayer ritual policy is in my view outweighed by the aims which it seeks to promote in the interests of the school community as a whole, including Muslim pupils.”
He also upheld the student’s challenge to a decision to temporarily exclude her from the school.
The school’s lawyers had claimed that the governors and headteacher at the school of some 700 pupils, about half of whom are Muslim, had “a margin of latitude, discretion or judgement” over its policies.
During a two-day hearing, Ms Birbalsingh said on social media that it was defending its “culture and ethos” along with decisions to “maintain a successful and stable learning environment where children of all races and religions can thrive”.
Posting on X, formerly known as Twitter, she said the school decided “to stop prayer rituals when some pupils started them, against a backdrop of events including violence, intimidation and appalling racial harassment of our teachers”.
The court was told that Ms Birbalsingh first introduced the policy in March last year, with it being backed by the governing body in May – allegedly “on the basis of misinformation and errors”.
In March 2023, up to 30 students began praying in the school’s yard, using blazers to kneel on.
Lawyers for the school said students seen praying outside contributed to a “concerted campaign” on social media over the school’s approach to religion, with there also being a since-removed online petition attracting thousands of signatures.
The court heard the school was targeted with death threats, abuse, “false” allegations of Islamophobia, and a “bomb hoax”.
Reversing the school’s “emergency” ban would again expose it to “an unacceptable risk of threats”, its lawyers said, adding that it avoided “the logistical disruption and detriments to other school activities”.
The court was told “Muslim children were observed to be applying peer pressure to other Muslim children to act in certain ways”, with the school claiming that allowing prayer rituals risked “undermining inclusion and social cohesion between pupils”.
Following the hearing, Ms Birbalsingh told The Sunday Times the legal process was “taking a massive toll” and argued the school should “be allowed to be secular”.
She told the paper the school will “definitely appeal if we lose”, adding: “I will not divide children according to race and religion; it will not happen under my watch.”
