A Jewish school has been found guilty of race discrimination by the UK’s Supreme Court for refusing places to pupils it did not consider to be ethnically Jewish.

Nine justices ruled, by a small majority, that the JFS in London had breached race relations legislation.

The case was brought by a Jewish man whose son was not given a place because his wife was not regarded as Jewish under rules set by the Chief Rabbi.

Dr. Simon Hochhauser, President of United Synagogue, said they were “extremely disappointed” with the Supreme Court ruling, which, he said “interferes with the Torah-based imperative on us to educate Jewish children, regardless of their background.”

“Practice tests are anathema to the United Synagogue, which for centuries has opened its institutions to all Jews, observant or not. These practice tests have no relevance under Jewish law and serve only to support the notion of a test of religion in the eyes of the English legal system. As Lord Brown noted, essentially we must now apply a ‘Non-Jewish definition of who is Jewish.'”

In his dissenting opinion, Lord Brown pointed out the decision’s violation of religious freedom. “The root question for the Court is simply this: can a Jewish faith school ever give preference to those who are members of the Jewish religion under Jewish law. I would answer: yes, it can. To hold the contrary would be to stigmatise Judaism as a directly racially discriminating religion.”

However, giving the majority verdict, Supreme Court President Lord Philips said: “The majority of the court has concluded that the JFS admission policy does discriminate on the grounds of ethnic origin and is, in consequence, unlawful.”

“A minority disagrees, considering that the admission requirement is exclusively a religious requirement and does not depend on ethnic origin.”

But he stressed that while the school had acted unlawfully over its admissions, it should not be regarded as racist.

“The majority have made it plain in their judgments that the fact that the JFS admission policy has fallen foul of the Race Relations Act certainly does not mean those responsible for the admissions policy have behaved in a way that is racist, as that word as generally understood.”

The school went to the Supreme Court after three judges at the Court of Appeal ruled in June that the entry criteria had racially discriminated against the boy, known as M.

Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks said the matter required “careful reflection and consultation” and instant reactions would be inappropriate.

“The closeness of the court’s judgement indicates how complex this case was, both in English law and in debated issues of Jewish identity.

“Our office will be working closely together with the schools, the United Synagogue, the Board of Deputies and other interested parties to consider the implications of the verdict before making a full response.”

The 12-year-old boy was refused a place at the JFS (formerly known as the Jews’ Free School) in Brent, north London, despite regularly attending a Progressive synagogue.

While his father is Jewish by birth, his mother is Jewish by conversion. In Judaism, the faith and ethnicity of Jews is passed from the mother rather than from the father.

However, the conversion ceremony was conducted by a Progressive rather than an Orthodox synagogue, which is not recognised by the Office of the Chief Rabbi.

The children of atheists, and practising Christians, were allowed to attend the school as long as their mothers were considered Jewish.

Although Liberal Jews say faith is about belief rather than ethnic origin, Orthodox Jewish supporters of the school said the Supreme Court’s ruling risked infringing their human rights by interfering with the way they have always been defined.

Schools Secretary Ed Balls said: “All faith schools must follow admission procedures that are non-discriminatory, and consistent with the admissions code and the law.

“This is the case in the vast majority of faith schools and I understand that the JFS has amended its admissions policy in light of updated guidance from the Office of the Chief Rabbi.”