HOWZAT

In court her lawyers claimed that the school, which allows Muslim and Sikh students to wear headscarfs and religious bracelets, breached her human rights by preventing her from wearing the ring.

At a recent hearing at the High Court in London, human rights barrister Paul Diamond, appearing for Ms Playfoot, argued that the secular school authorities had no right to set themselves up as arbiters of faith and “cannot rule on religious truth”.

Mr Diamond, who also represented Nadia Eweida in the British Airways “cross” case, argued that the school authorities were violating Ms Playfoot's right to “freedom of thought, conscience and religion” under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The rings stem from the “Silver Ring Thing” movement which started in the US. They are worn by Christian teenagers to symbolise a pledge not to have sex before marriage and have led to an impassioned debate over religious expression and sex education.

Ms Playfoot's father and mother work as volunteer trustees of the Silver Ring Thing, Mr Playfoot as director of the parents programme and Mrs Playfoot as company secretary. However, Ms Playfoot's press spokesman said that it was her grandfather who encouraged her to go to court; her parents had urged her to give up but she had persisted.

Ms Playfoot insisted that the “the wearing of the ring was, to me, a demonstration of my Christian faith and values".

“I still believe the decision by the governors of the school goes against the Article 9 rights to Freedom of Religion and my right to express my faith in word or deed, in a democratic, Christian-based country.”

“I shall be consulting my legal team to consider whether to [make a direct application for] appeal ," she added

Vanessa James, head of employment at SA Law, said: "Schools, local authorities and also businesses should welcome today's decision as it helps bring some clarity to individuals’ rights in circumstances where dress codes need to be enforced."

"To allow Ms Playfoot's ring would open floodgates for all religious groups and breakaway sects to rely on any symbol they choose on the basis that it has meaning to them. If this is allowed it will be near on impossible to enforce dress codes where the boundaries are so blurred that is impossible to differentiate genuine religious expression from an excuse to breach a dress code."

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure