[Darryl Telfer]

Exemption under S555(1)(e)(ii) a building used or occupied solely as the residence of a minister of religion in connection with any such church or building,

Does exemption apply if used/occupied by Sister of the Church?

Would appreciated your thoughts.

[Andrew Butcher]

Hi Darryl
Some recent legal advice I received has made me question the linkage between the residence and the place of public worship.
As you are aware the Act says;
555(1)(e) land that belongs to a religious body and is occupied and used in connection with—
(i) a church or other building used or occupied for public worship, or
(ii) a building used or occupied solely as the residence of a minister of religion in connection with any such church or building, or
(iii) a building used or occupied for the purpose of religious teaching or training, or
(iv) a building used or occupied solely as the residence of the official head or the assistant official head (or both) of any religious body in the State or in any diocese within the State,
I would question how the Sister’s residence is used in connection with a church.
No doubt the property passes the first test of belonging to a religious body, the next test for me would be how is it used in connection with, (i) – (iv).
Happy to discuss further if you would like.

Regards,
Andrew

[Darryl Telfer]

Thanks Andrew,

I was trying to keep the question as simple as possible (so it made sense to me (gotta be able to laugh at yourself).
In addition to being a residence (of the sister) the applicant also claims the property is “used or occupied for the purpose of religious teaching or training, and actually quotes/refers to s555(1)(e)(iii).

It was the “sister” part I was trying to clarify but I guess if it satisfies one criteria, that’s all they need to do.

Cheers.

[Author]

Posts