A leading Jewish state school goes to the new Supreme Court today to challenge a ruling that it broke race laws.

JFS, formerly the Jewish Free School, which is heavily oversubscribed, refused to admit a boy because his mother had converted to the religion at a Progressive rather than an Orthodox synagogue.

This summer the Court of Appeal found that the school in Brent, northwest London, had discriminated against the child on racial grounds.

The ruling put the court at loggerheads with the Office of the Chief Rabbi (OCR) and had serious ramifications for admissions to Jewish schools.

It also meant faith schools could no longer turn away children who “failed” the test of ethnicity.

Now the school will attempt to reinstate its admissions policy in the Supreme Court, at a hearing that is due to last three days.

Both the school and the parents of the boy, known only as M, are thought to have appointed leading barristers.

Dinah Rose, QC, representing M, said at a previous hearing that JFS would accept a child of Jewish-born “committed atheists” but exclude others because of their mother’s descent even if they were “Jewish by belief and practice”.

John Halford, who has represented the boy’s father, said earlier this year: “It is unlawful for a child’s ethnic origins to be used as the criterion for school entry. Such a practice is even more unacceptable in the case of a comprehensive school funded by the taxpayer.”

Judaism is passed on through the maternal line or through conversion, and must be approved by the OCR.

Another child who was rejected by JFS is the daughter of its head of English, Kate Lightman. Mrs Lightman’s conversion did not meet with approval and her child, Maya, was refused a place.

Her husband David, a former pupil at JFS, has submitted a statement supporting M’s parents that will be read to the Supreme Court.

In a copy seen by The Times he says: “I am sure during the hearing there will be many well argued and considered legal arguments.

“What I think will be absent will be someone talking about what all of this means in simple human terms to the families and children who are affected by the admissions criteria that have been used by JFS.

“We wanted our middle child Maya to attend JFS. Our deep desire for her to do so was fuelled by our commitment to Judaism and the connection which we both have with the school.

“Maya herself has many friends at JFS and was extremely keen to attend it. We applied for a place and were not successful because the Office of the Chief Rabbi refuses to recognise Kate as Jewish and, accordingly, refuses to recognise Maya’s Jewish status.

“Because the decision to exclude Maya from the school depends on Kate’s status, there is nothing that we can do about it.

“Maya is excluded from the school simply because of who her mother is and not because of her own religion or belief.

“For five long, hard and painful years we have tried to fight for the right to send our child to the school of our, and her, choice. During that time we have often felt alone and with the world against us.

“The first thing that we feel is an enormous and overwhelming sense of frustration and alienation.

“We also feel great personal hurt and distress at the rejection of our child on the basis of who her mother is, and not what she or we as a family believe or practise. Maya feels ostracised and picked on that she cannot go to JFS while she knows so many who can.

“My wife feels enormous strain and pressure in her role as head of English at JFS. I can honestly say that in the last five years, there hasn’t been a day when we haven’t thought about the case or felt its implications.”

Many other Jewish schools have similar admissions policies. JFS is one of Britain’s oldest Jewish schools and is the largest Orthodox Jewish school in Europe, with 2,000 pupils. It is described by Ofsted as outstanding.

The Court of Appeal ruling in June said: “If for theological reasons a fully subscribed Christian faith school refused to admit a child on the ground that, albeit practising Christians, the child’s family were of Jewish origin, it is hard to see what answer there could be to a claim for race discrimination. The refusal of JFS to admit M was accordingly, in our judgment, less favourable treatment of him on racial grounds.”

Times recommends

• Students abandon the drink for gyms and juice
• Ofsted: third of Baby P-style reviews inadequate
• Top boys' school picks first woman head