Showing posts with label Scientology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Scientology. Show all posts

Friday, July 18, 2014

Scientology Official Need Not Give Deposition In Harassment Suit

In In re David Miscavige, (TX App., July 17, 2014), a Texas appellate court ordered a trial court to withdraw its order compelling David Miscavige, head of the Church of Scientology's Religious Technology Center, to give his deposition in a suit filed by the wife of a former Scientology member.  Plaintiff Monique Rathbun claimed that she and her husband Mark were subjected to three years of harassment after Mark spoke to national media about Miscavige's alleged misconduct. In ruling for Miscavige, the court applied the so-called "apex deposition" doctrine that is designed to protect high-ranking corporate officials from burdensome, expensive, and harassing discovery. San Antonio Express-News reports on the decision.

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Former Scientologist Sues Church For Return of Funds

Courthouse News Service reported yesterday on a lawsuit filed recently in a California state trial court against the Church of Scientology and a number of its affiliates. Plaintiff Vance Woodward, an attorney, seeks return of $200,000 he paid for "auditing" courses he never received, as well as punitive damages.  He contends that the Church took thousands of dollars from him and others through claims that Scientology would bestow superhuman powers on them. In total he turned over $600,000 to the church, $200,000 of which went for allegedly shoddy courses that were useless or harmful.  He claims the Church obtained his funds through psychological manipulation and abuse.

Thursday, December 12, 2013

Britain's Supreme Court Holds Scientology Chapel Is Place of "Religious Worship" Where Marriages May Be Solemnized

In R (on the application of Hodkin and another) .v Registrar General of Births, Deaths and Marriages, (UK Sup. Ct,, Dec. 11, 2013), Britain's Supreme Court overruled a 1970 Court of Appeal case and held that a chapel of the Church of Scientology qualifies under the Places of Worship Registration Act 1855 as "a place of meeting for religious worship." Therefore the Registrar General should have recorded it as a place at which marriages may be solemnized under the Marriage Act 1949.  In so holding,  Lord Toulson wrote:
... [R]eligion should not be confined to religions which recognise a supreme deity. First and foremost, to do so would be a form of religious discrimination unacceptable in today’s society. It would exclude Buddhism, along with other faiths such as Jainism, Taoism, Theosophy and part of Hinduism.... 
For the purposes of PWRA, I would describe religion in summary as a spiritual or non-secular belief system, held by a group of adherents, which claims to explain mankind’s place in the universe and relationship with the infinite, and to teach its adherents how they are to live their lives in conformity with the spiritual understanding associated with the belief system. By spiritual or non-secular I mean a belief system which goes beyond that which can be perceived by the senses or ascertained by the application of science.... Such a belief system may or may not involve belief in a supreme being, but it does involve a belief that there is more to be understood about mankind’s nature and relationship to the universe than can be gained from the senses or from science. I emphasise that this is intended to be a description and not a definitive formula.
The court went on to hold that the Scientology chapel is a place of meeting for religious "worship," concluding that it is sufficient that the location is one where members perform religious rites, whether or not the rites involve adoration of a deity:
fine theological or liturgical niceties as to how precisely they see and express their relationship with the infinite ... are more fitting for theologians than for the Registrar General or the courts. 
Lord Wilson wrote a separate concurring opinion, joined by 3 other justices holding that the Registrar General's role in registering houses of worship is more than ministerial. The court also issued a press summary of the decision.  Time reports that the decision may have broad ramifications.  (See prior related posting.)