Judgment on merits of telecoms installation raised issue of applying Duffield criteria for “modest harm”, later resolved by Court of Arches in appeal on Victorian font
The judgment Re St Anne Wandsworth [2015] Southwark Const Ct, Philip Petchey Ch. concerned the installation of telecommunications equipment within the bell chamber of this Grade II* listed church. The court assessed that the proposed works would result in only “modest harm”, and the chancellor assessed this against the criteria in Re St Alkmund, Duffield [2013] Fam 158, “the Duffield questions”. The application of these was reviewed in the context of three recent judgments in the secular courts, and it was suggested that it might be necessary for them to be revisited by the Court of Arches. However, in its consideration of Re St. Peter Shipton Bellinger [2015], an appeal from the Consistory Court of Winchester, the Court of Arches subsequently concluded that no revision of these guidelines was necessary.
This post considers the three main aspects: Health and other IT issues; Aesthetic implications; and the Assessment of modest harm, first in relation to the judgment in St Anne, Wandsworth; then it reviews the findings of the Court of Arches in Re St. Peter Shipton Bellinger [2015] with regard to the “Duffield questions“.