Ecclesiastical court judgments – 2022

Posted on by

Index to ecclesiastical court judgments reviewed during 2022, and links to annual reviews for previous years

During 2022, our monthly round-ups reviewed over 150 consistory court judgments, and these featured:

Also reported were CDM Decisions and Safeguarding, Reports from the Independent Reviewer, Privy Council Business,  Visitations and CFCE Determinations, as well as links to other posts relating to ecclesiastical law.

Procedural

Re St Michael and All Angels Berwick [2021] ECC Chi 9 The Chancellor had issued a stay of proceedings, pending the outcome of a determination by the Dean of Arches of an appeal against a decision of the Deputy Chancellor. However he decided that the stay should be lifted and the matter determined via the Online Faculty System. [Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2021] ECC Chi 9] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Jesus College Cambridge [2022] ECC Ely 1 The judgment deals with procedural and evidential issues, including refusing the objectors’ application to adjourn the hearing listed for 2-4 February 2022 in order to obtain the expert evidence of a historian, and refusing the petitioners’ application to call an eighth witness. [Re Jesus College Cambridge [2022] ECC Ely 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

The Revd Clive Roger Evans, Ruling on Jurisdiction. The CDM Tribunal considered, and rejected, the submission that it lacked jurisdiction to hear allegation (a) because there is no allegation of, for example, inappropriate or sexual behaviour. Rather the allegation boils down simply to the fact that the Respondent was incorrectly vested. (March 2022).

Reordering, extensions and other building works

Substantial reordering

Re St John the Evangelist Abbeydale [2022] ECC She 7 Petition granted for extensive internal reordering works. The Chancellor was satisfied that, notwithstanding the loss of the remaining fixed seating, the works would have little impact on the overall architectural character and appearance of the building. [Re St. John the Evangelist Abbeydale [2021] ECC She 7] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Nicolas Great Bookham [2022] ECC Gui 3 The parish wished to carry out extensive internal reordering works to the church. The main item of contention was the removal of the 19th century stained deal pews (in order to afford greater flexibility to worship and community activities) and their replacement with 200 Howe 40/4 chairs The Chancellor granted a faculty which authorised, inter alia, the replacement of all the pews with chairs. [Re St. Nicolas Great Bookham [2022] ECC Gui 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Werburgh Chorlton-cum-Hardy [2022] ECC Man 1 The church wished to carry out major reordering, in order to make the church more welcoming and more suited to contemporary worship, which would include the reuse of the chancel as an entrance and welcome area, an altar at the west end and the pews being replaced with upholstered, stackable chairs. The Chancellor was satisfied that the changes were necessary and granted a faculty. [Re St. Werburgh Chorlton-cum-Hardy [2022] ECC Man 1] [Top of section] [Top]

Re St Mary the Virgin Fawley [2022] ECC Oxf 3 The priest in charge and churchwardens petitioned for a faculty to permit reordering works. Notwithstanding concerns of the amenity societies, the Chancellor determined to grant a faculty, being satisfied that any harm to the significance of the church was likely to be outweighed by the public benefits to be generated as a result of the proposals. [Re St Mary the Virgin Fawley [2022] ECC Oxf 3] [Top of section] [top of post]

Re Christ Church Dore [2022] ECC She 2 A very extensive reordering of the church was proposed. The Chancellor decided that the scheme as a whole was appropriate, and granted a faculty for all the works, with the exception of the proposal to remove the choir stalls.  [Re Christ Church Dore [2022] ECC She 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Bitton [2022] ECC Bri 3 A major reordering of the Grade I church was proposed. Much of the work related to adjusting floor levels, improving access and installing underfloor heating. Notwithstanding concerns expressed by the amenity societies, the Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the public benefit of greater accessibility would assist the church as a local centre of worship and mission. [Re St. Mary Bitton [2022] ECC Bri 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Holy Trinity Clapham [2022] ECC Swk 4 An extensive programme of reordering was proposed for the Grade II* Georgian church, including replacing the existing extensions on the north and south sides of the church and the replacement of the nave pews with ‘Theo M’ stackable chairs. Whilst acknowledging the significance of the pews and existing architecture of the church, the Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that any harm to such significance would be outweighed by the public benefit. In his judgment, the Chancellor addressed the meaning of ‘serious’ in the fifth Duffield question. [Re Holy Trinity Clapham [2022] ECC Swk 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Cossington [2022] ECC Lei 3 The rector and churchwardens had presented two faculty petitions; for an extensive programme of repairs and reordering of the church interior; and an extension to the church on the north side, with other works in the churchyard. The Deputy Chancellor was satisfied that the benefits of the proposals outweighed any limited harm that they might cause and he therefore granted a faculty for each phase of the proposed works. [Re All Saints Cossington [2022] ECC Lei 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Reordering and alternative uses

Re St Mary the Virgin Wheatley [2021] ECC Oxf 8 The petition proposed several items of reordering; the Victorian Society became a party opponent, objecting to one specific item, namely, the treatment of the Victorian plain black and red tiling in the nave of the Grade II* church. The Chancellor granted a faculty for all items in the petition, except in respect of the stone floor finish. He directed that as many of the original tiles as possible should be salvaged and re-laid with as many suitable reproduction tiles as may be required. [Re St. Mary the Virgin Wheatley [2021] ECC Oxf 8] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Mary Bloxham [2021] ECC Oxf 9 Faculty granted for introduction of two pods with curved wooden screens connected by a curved step to form a continuous arc across the west end of the church which would accommodate toilet and kitchen facilities. [Re St. Mary Bloxham [2021] ECC Oxf 9] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. John the Evangelist Blackpool [2022] ECC Bla 2 The Vicar and Churchwardens wished to carry out an extensive programme of reordering to facilitate the use of the church as a ‘Resource Church’. The Chancellor was satisfied that, far from causing harm to the significance of the church (which had been dramatically changed by previous reorderings before it was listed), the proposals would enhance the setting, and any harm would be outweighed by public benefits. The Chancellor granted a faculty for all the proposals, with the exception of the lectern. [Re St. John the Evangelist Blackpool [2022] ECC Bla 2 ] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary the Virgin Welling [2022] ECC Swk 3 The original gas boiler of the 1950s unlisted church had failed, been condemned as unsafe and removed. In the present case the Chancellor decided that it would be unreasonable not to allow the present proposal and he therefore granted a faculty. [Re St Mary the Virgin, Welling] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Other building works, including re-roofing

Re St Mary the Virgin Charlbury [2021] ECC Oxf 10 Faculty granted for conversion of an existing kitchen to a new WC, with disabled access and baby-changing facilities, and the creation of a new kitchen ‘pod’ . Chancellor determined that the proposals would cause only moderate harm to the appearance of the Grade I listed church, which would be outweighed by the benefits of the new facilities. [Re St. Mary the Virgin Charlbury [2021] ECC Oxf 10] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St George Newcastle [2021] ECC New 3 The petitioners sought an amendment to the judgment in Re St. George Newcastle [2020] ECC New 2, which related to an extension to the north-east corner of the church and works in the churchyard. Chancellor determined to allow the petitioners to proceed with the construction of a new boundary wall, and he extended the period for completion of the work for three years, but he declined a request to permit foundations for the extension to be laid and was not prepared to otherwise waive the main condition that no works should commence until all necessary funds were available. [Re St. George Newcastle [2021] ECC New 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Holy Trinity Jesmond [2021] ECC New 4 The Chancellor granted a faculty for alterations to the baptistry floor to provide a raised floor, level with the octagonal font plinth, and the covering of the raised floor and plinth with carpet tiles. [Re Holy Trinity Jesmond [2021] ECC New 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Rennington [2021] ECC New 2 The Chancellor granted a faculty for the removal and disposal of a ‘redundant altar table’, and the introduction of a table and cupboards, for the serving of refreshments, and a more practical floor covering. [Re All Saints Rennington [2021] ECC New 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Peter and St Paul Hoxne [2022] ECC SEI 1 The church sought to repair and reassemble a screen, formerly under the tower arch, to repair Lady Chapel steps, shorten two pews, reassemble the screen at the bottom of the steps and dedicate the chapel to St. Edmund. List B consent for some of works only. Faculty was put on hold pending discussions with the objector, but the parish installed the screen anyway, and then applied for permission for the screen and shortened pews to remain. Faculty granted. [Re St. Peter and St. Paul Hoxne [2022] ECC SEI 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Budeaux Devonport [2022] ECC Exe 1 Faculty granted for the creation of a disabled access toilet, a relocated and expanded kitchenette area and the removal of some pews at the front and back of the main nave pew block. There were three objectors who did not become parties opponent. [Re St. Budeaux Devonport [2022] ECC Exe 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Mary the Virgin Clifton Campville [2022] ECC Lic 1 The church had been declared redundant in 2001 and in 2004 a lease for 99 years had been granted to a charity which applied for a faculty to lay a foul drain through churchyard to take the waste from a disabled toilet which was to be installed. One objector, but LA had approved the proposal, and it was believed that there were no burials in the churchyard which would be affected by the laying of the drain. The Chancellor therefore granted a faculty. [Re St. Mary the Virgin Clifton Campville [2022] ECC Lic 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Saviour Nottingham [2022] ECC S&N 1 Contractual conditions re installation of some soft-play equipment, for which conditions ot 2018 not met. Chancellor granted a faculty approving the proposed agreement, subject to a condition that it should come to an end on 30 September 2024. [Re St. Saviour Nottingham [2022] ECC S&N 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Hurstpierpoint College Chapel [2022] ECC Chi 1 The Chancellor granted permission for certain improvements, mainly to the chancel of the chapel, notwithstanding an objection by the Victorian Society. [Re Hurstpierpoint College Chapel [2022] ECC Chi 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Luke Birmingham [2021] ECC Bir 1 The proposals were to increase the size of the stage upon which the altar was situated; to install a new screen for the projector; and to move the Cross from its present position. A faculty was granted for the Cross to be moved along the wall towards the stage opposite the entrance door, so that it would be viewed clearly when entering the worship area. [Re St. Luke Birmingham [2021] ECC Bir 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. John the Baptist Tisbury [2022] ECC Sal 1 The Chancellor, being mindful that the east window should provide a key liturgical focus in worship, granted a faculty, subject to a condition inter alia that the incumbent and churchwarden should within 30 months apply for a faculty for the retention of parts of the Clutterbuck window in the easternmost window of the north aisle. [Re St. John the Baptist Tisbury [2022] ECC Sal 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Helen Burghwallis [2022] ECC She 1 The petitioners wished to re-tile the church roof reusing 70% of the old tiles, and also take the opportunity to fit insulation into the roof. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to conditions. [Re St. Helen Burghwallis [2022] ECC She 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary the Virgin Ashwell [2022] ECC StA 2 A brick-built barrel vault was discovered underneath the floor and the petitioners sought to mark this having a cross incised on the stone floor above the vault and by placing on the adjacent wall a stone tablet recording the discovery of the vault in 2020. The Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty for  the incised cross, but did not consider that the circumstances were sufficiently exceptional to justify a wall tablet being placed on the adjacent wall in the church. [Re St. Mary the Virgin Ashwell [2022] ECC StA 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Lawrence Eyam [2022] ECC Der 1 The Chancellor granted a faculty for the works to the porch and the new fire exit door, but he was not satisfied that it was appropriate to authorise the removal of the pipe organ at this stage, as possible relocation of the organ within the church had not been fully explored, nor the alternative of replacing the organ with a smaller pipe organ, and the petition did not request authority for the installation of a particular electronic organ. [Re St. Lawrence Eyam [2022] ECC Der 1] [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re St. Leonard Southoe [2022] ECC Ely 4 The incumbent and churchwardens applied for a faculty to permit various items of reordering in order to provide facilities in the church for a wide range of church and community events in what is a fairly isolated village. The Chancellor granted a faculty, to enable the petitioners to move forward with obtaining funding, but he reserved a decision as to whether the kitchen facilities should be enclosed or not until he had visited the church and made a final decision. [Re St. Leonard Southoe [2022] ECC Ely 4] [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re St. Christopher Ellistown [2022] ECC Lei 2 Chancellor granted faculty for addition of adding a new porch with glazed doors to provide easier access, a more welcoming entrance, and to minimize draughts. [Re St. Christopher Ellistown [2022] ECC Lei 2] [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re All Saints Haslingfield [2021] ECC Ely 2 In March 2019 a stained glass window in the vestry had been removed under an emergency faculty. A confirmatory faculty was granted in July 2019. The petitioners now wished to have the window, a mixture of medieval and Victorian glass, repaired and reinstated. The Chancellor saw no merit in the objector’s arguments and granted a faculty. [Re All Saints Haslingfield [2021] ECC Ely 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Harbury [2022] ECC Cov 3 The proposed works to the church comprised electrical rewiring and new lighting; the installation of an audio-visual system; and a new heating system. The Diocesan Advisory Committee had some concerns about  the proposal to install roof-mounted horizontal low temperature hot water radiant panel heaters. The Chancellor decided that the petitioners had shown a convincing argument for each part of the scheme and he granted a faculty. [Re All Saints Harbury [2022] ECC Cov 3] [Top of section] [top of post]

Re St. Peter St. Helier [2022] ECC Swk 2 The Chancellor granted a faculty for the removal of a mural from the west front of the church, a brick building consecrated in 1933 and unlisted. [Re St. Peter St. Helier [2022] ECC Swk 2] [top of post]

Re St. Paul Bedford [2022] ECC StA 3 The petitioners sought to redesign the north porch as the main entrance of the church and re-site the medieval statues of St. Peter and St. Paul. The Chancellor determined that, for reasons of security, visibility and protection from weathering, inter alia, the statues would be better placed in the refurbished south porch. The Chancellor granted a faculty for these and all the other proposed works. [Re St. Paul Bedford [2022] ECC StA 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary the Virgin Hook [2022] ECC She 3 Reordering proposals included replacing the church pews with chairs, new audio-visual equipment, moving the font, an accessible WC, a kitchenette, storage and blue carpet runners. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had made a good case for the works and granted a faculty for all the works, subject to the replacement chairs being made of wood, in accordance with the guidelines of the Church Buildings Council. [Re St. Mary the Virgin Hook [2022] ECC She 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. James Staveley [2022] ECC Car 3 The main proposals for the Grade II Victorian church were for new glazed porch doors, a new inner glazed door (whilst retaining the historic timber doors), and improved access arrangements. The Chancellor considered that the justification for the works outweighed the low degree of potential harm to the church, and granted a faculty. [Re St. James Staveley [2022] ECC Car 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Mixbury [2022] ECC Oxf 6 In 2020 the Chancellor had granted a faculty to authorize the temporary removal and storage of the iron railing around the church, in order to facilitate the carrying out of repairs. The Chancellor granted a faculty to make this permanent. [Re All Saints Mixbury [2022] ECC Oxf 6] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Michael & All Angels Dalston [2022] ECC Car 4 The Chancellor granted permission for the construction of a new single storey extension to the north of the church, to provide a multi-function room for church and community use, a library facility and an office, and also convert the vestry extension to provide access to the community centre and an accessible toilet and kitchen. [Re St. Michael & All Angels Dalston [2022] ECC Car 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Leake [2022] ECC Yor 1 Several items of repair and reordering were proposed. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had made a good case for the proposals and he accordingly granted a faculty. [Re St. Mary Leake [2022] ECC Yor 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Helmsley [2022] ECC Yor 2 Collier Ch. determined that two British Legion flags should be returned to the positions previously agreed for them above the war memorial, that the military flag should be put back where it was originally, behind the chancel arch, and the third British Legion flag should be removed from the church. [Re All Saints Helmsley [2022] ECC Yor 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Removal and replacement of pews

Re All Saints Garsdon [2021] ECC Bri 5 The petitioners applied for an amendment to a Faculty regarding the introduction of upholstered metal chairs to replace seven pews that were removed under Faculty.  The Chancellor was persuaded that the chairs petitioned for would be appropriate in the particular circumstances of this case. [Re All Saints Garsdon [2021] ECC Bri 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Leonard Hythe [2022] ECC Can 1 The Commissary General gave directions for the Archdeacon to be removed as the respondent and replaced by the Churchwardens and PCC. He also considered it appropriate, in the interests of certainty, to issue a restitution order, and he directed that the new respondents should pay the costs of the application and of the hearing. [Re St. Leonard Hythe [2022] ECC Can 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Holy Cross Ashton Keynes [2022] ECC Bri 1 The petitioners wished to remove 6 pews from the back of the church, to provide an open space that could be used as a welcome and circulation space and for post service social time, and to shorten 14 other pews. The Victorian Society and Historic England raised objections to the removal of 6 pews. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that any harm caused to the significance of the Church was justified by the public benefits that would result from the works. [Re Holy Cross Ashton Keynes [2022] ECC Bri 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Peter Frimley [2022] ECC Gui 2 Further to a major reordering approved by faculty in 2010, the Petitioners sought to replacing the dark wood podium, altar, credence table, lectern and choir chairs in the chancel with new furniture in a light oak. The Chancellor was satisfied that the removal of the pews would not materially harm the interior of the church and would blend in better with the light oak furniture in the chancel. He was also persuaded that the proposed chairs were suitable for flexible use of the church, and the proposed colour would fit well with other colours in the church. He therefore granted a faculty. [Re St. Peter Frimley [2022] ECC Gui 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Andrew Thursford [2022] ECC Nor 1 Chancellor granted faculty for removal of 25 pews at the rear of the church and installation of new stained-glass window in the Chad Chapel, notwithstanding concerns from amenity societies. [Re St. Andrew Thursford [2022] ECC Nor 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Gregory Sudbury [2022] ECC SEI 2 The petitioners sought permission to introduce 15 quartz halogen heaters into the church and also replace the windows in the ringing chamber. The Chancellor was satisfied that there was a clear justification for carrying out the proposals, which would outweigh any harm caused by the introduction of the heaters. He granted a faculty for the heaters and also for the replacement windows for the ringing chamber. [Re St. Gregory Sudbury [2022] ECC SEI 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Leonard Aldrington [2022] ECC Chi 2 The Chancellor granted a faculty for some reordering works, which included replacement seating, as he was satisfied that the public benefit to be derived from the changes would outweigh any harm to the church. [Re St. Leonard Aldrington [2022] ECC Chi 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2022] EACC 1 This judgment  relates to an appeal to the Court of Arches against the decision of the Deputy Chancellor of Chichester Diocese in Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2021] ECC Chi 7. The Arches Court allowed the appeal on the basis that the conduct of the proceedings in the Consistory Court had been flawed, in that the Deputy Chancellor had erroneously assumed that the proposal was to remove all the seating in the church, including the rush-seated chairs, which was not the case. [Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2022] EACC 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2022] ECC Chi 3 This judgement deals with matters preliminary to a re-hearing, including a challenge to the Consistory Court’s power to direct a further oral hearing, questions as to costs, and directions for a new hearing. [Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2022] ECC Chi 3] [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re St. Mary Magdalene Stilton [2021] ECC Ely 1 The Chancellor granted a faculty for twelve blue upholstered chairs to replace the front two rows of pews only. He indicated that if a further faculty was sought for more blue upholstered chairs, he would not be minded to grant one unless a more suitable colour was chosen and the existing chairs were reupholstered in the same colour. [Re St. Mary Magdalene Stilton [2021] ECC Ely 1] [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re Christ Church Silloth [2022] ECC Car 2 The Deputy Chancellor decided to grant a faculty, being satisfied that the petitioners had taken great care in looking at all the possible options and that the red upholstery would not look out of place in this particular Victorian church, where the interior was decorated in red and yellow bands of brickwork. [Re Christ Church Silloth [2022] ECC Car 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. John the Evangelist Weymouth [2022] ECC Sal 3 The Vicar and Churchwarden petitioned for a faculty permitting the replacement of their existing upholstered timber framed chairs (installed under faculty as part of a significant reordering in 1985) with new  chrome-framed SB2M chairs, upholstered with a cleanable suede-like ‘Nappa’ fabric , which would be more stackable than the existing chairs. The Diocesan Advisory Committee did not recommend the proposal. Whilst being satisfied that a case had been made for replacing upholstered chairs with new upholstered chairs, the Chancellor considered that chrome-framed chairs would create too stark a contrast in the Grade II* church. She therefore declined to approve the proposed chrome-framed chairs, but approved the alternative wooden framed upholstered chairs which the petitioners had offered as a compromise choice. [Re St. John the Evangelist Weymouth 2022 ECC Sal 3] [Post]  [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re St. Peter North Tawton [2022] ECC Exe 3 Petitioners sought the removal of two rows of pews, and the extension of the gallery over it. The Chancellor was satisfied that a good case had been made for these items and other improvements to the existing facilities and he granted a faculty. [Re St. Peter North Tawton [2022] ECC Exe 3] [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re St. Peter Sibton [2022] ECC SEI 3 The proposed works were the installation of four stained glass panels in the three south chancel window openings of the Grade I listed church and the shortening of all but four of seventeen pews, The Chancellor, having considered a detailed analysis of situation prepared by the petitioners, granted a faculty for all the proposed works. [Re St. Peter Sibton [2022] ECC SEI 3] [Post] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Peter Conisbrough [2022] ECC She 4 The incumbent and churchwardens granted faculty for removal a number of pews, and to laying blue carpet tiles in the space which would be left after removal of the pews.  [Re St. Peter Conisbrough [2022] ECC She 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Michael and All Angels Berwick [2022] ECC Chi 5 This was a re-hearing of the petition considered in Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2021] ECC Chi 7, following the decision of the Court of Arches in Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2022] EACC 1 to remit the case to the Consistory Court for re-determination. The Deputy Chancellor was satisfied that that there was a clear justification for the proposed works and she therefore granted a faculty. [Re St. Michael & All Angels Berwick [2022] ECC Chi 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary the Virgin Primrose Hill [2022] ECC Lon 2 The Petitioners sought post facto permission for the introduction into the church of 150 new upholstered chairs of mixed colours – 65 white, 65 light blue, 10 pink and 10 lavender. The Chancellor determined that there was no convincing need for more than one colour, but bearing in mind that the majority of the chairs were in the two muted colours of white and light blue, and had been purchased at considerable expense, he granted a faculty for the white and blue chairs to remain, but directed that the brighter-coloured chairs (10 pink and 10 lavender) should be removed from the church. [Re St. Mary the Virgin Primrose Hill [2022] ECC Lon 2] [Top of section] [Top]

Re St. Michael Upton Warren [2022] ECC Wor 7 The Chancellor granted a faculty for the removal of the three pews and the chapel chairs and the introduction of up to 25 new wooden chairs, provided (inter alia) that: the new wooden chairs should be stained to match the surrounding woodwork; only the seats should be upholstered; and the colour of the upholstery should be a neutral colour to blend in with the colour of the wood. [Re St. Michael Upton Warren [2022] ECC Wor 7] Top of section] [Top]

Heating

Re All Saints Woodham [2022] ECC Gui 1 A new underfloor heating system was proposed for the church. At a meeting of the Victorian Society, the Church Building Council and the Diocesan Advisory Committee, a compromise version of the specification for the design of the tile flooring was agreed. The Chancellor granted a faculty. [Re All Saints Woodham [2022] ECC Gui 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary the Virgin Dedham [2022] ECC Chd 2 The church’s oil-fired heating boiler, installed 35 years previously, had come to the end of its working life and spare parts were no longer available. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the petitioners had considered the Church of England’s ‘Net Zero Roadmap’ and the Church Building Council’s guidance, and that the petitioners had also considered several alternative options. The Chancellor made it a condition of the faculty (inter alia) that so far as was practicable, gas supplied under a green tariff was to be used for the new system. [Re St. Mary the Virgin Dedham [2022] ECC Chd 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Saviour Croydon [2022] ECC Swk 5 The churchwardens applied for an interim faculty for the replacement of the existing gas boiler of the Grade II Victorian church with a new one. The Chancellor was satisfied that the Petitioners had carefully considered all the available options and that there was no alternative at reasonable cost to replacing the gas boiler with another gas boiler. Also, the urgency of the situation (a non-functioning boiler as winter approached) was a strong justification for granting a faculty. [Re St. Saviour Croydon [2022] ECC Swk 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

See also:

[2021 judgments] [2020 judgments] [2019 judgments] [2018 judgments] [2017 judgments] [2016 Judgments] [2015 Judgments] [2014 Judgments]

Church Treasures/Sale of Paintings/Loans/Memorials [5]

Re St Andrew Stockton-on-Teme [2022] ECC Wor 1 A churchwarden of nearly 40 years standing had died in 2004, and at some time after his death a memorial had been erected in the church, without faculty, bearing his family crest and a brief inscription. Chancellor granted a confirmatory a faculty subject to conditions regarding a better form of mounting of the memorial, the colour of the lettering, amendments to the wording and the method of fixing. [Re St. Andrew Stockton-on-Teme [2022] ECC Wor 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re The Rustat Memorial, Jesus College Cambridge, [2022] ECC Ely 2 The Deputy Chancellor refused to grant a faculty for the removal of the Rustat memorial. He considered that the removal of the Rustat memorial from the west wall of the Chapel would cause considerable, or notable, harm to the significance of the Chapel as a building of special architectural or historic interest, and he was not satisfied  that a clear and sufficiently convincing justification for the removal of the memorial had been made by the College. [Re the Rustat Memorial, Jesus College, Cambridge [2022] ECC Ely 2] [Post] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Jesus College Cambridge [2022] ECC Ely 5 The present judgment deals with an application for costs by the parties opponent. The Chancellor was satisfied that the College had on the whole acted reasonably, and that “any mistakes have tended to work to the benefit of the case advanced by the parties opponent rather than causing them to incur costs unnecessarily”. [Re Jesus College Cambridge [2022] ECC Ely 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Peter Dorchester [2022] ECC Sal 4 The Vicar and Churchwardens sought to move a memorial from inside the church to the County Museum next door to the church and erect a replacement memorial in the church. The Chancellor determined that in this case the public benefit to be derived from the removal of the memorial, subject to its replacement with a memorial omitting details which might cause offence, would outweigh the harm caused. [In the Matter of Dorchester, St Peter, Holy Trinity and All Saints, [2022] ECC Sal 4] [Top of post]

Re St. Andrew Shottery [2022] ECC Cov 4 The Petitioners sought to place a memorial plaque next to two similar plaques on the west wall inside the church in memory of: a former curate who had died whilst serving at the church as a result of a road traffic accident; and his son, who had been head chorister at the church and had subsequently joined the army and died on active service in Afghanistan. The Deputy Chancellor determined that the test of exceptionality was satisfied in view of the contributions made to the life of the church. [Re St. Andrew Shottery [2022] ECC Cov 4] [Top of section] [Top of post].

See also Re St. Paul Bedford, supra, re location of statues.

[2021 judgments] [2020 judgments] [2019 judgments] [2018 judgments] [2017 judgments] [2016 Judgments] [2014 Judgments] [Top]

Audio Visual Equipment

[2022 judgments (none)] [2021 judgments] [2020 judgments] [2019 judgments] [2018 judgments] [2017 judgments] [2016 Judgments] [2015 Judgments] [Top]

Telecommunications

[2022 judgments (none)] [2021 judgments (none)] [2020 judgments] [2019 judgments] [2018 judgments] [2017 judgments] [2016 Judgments] [2015 Judgments] [2014 Judgments] [Top]

Exhumation

Family graves

Re St. James West Dean [2022] ECC Glo 1 The petitioner wished to exhume the ashes of her late husband and reinter them in the grave of her parents within the same churchyard. As Chancellor found that the petitioner had been misinformed as to where her husband’s ashes had to be buried – in a newly created garden of remembrance – the Chancellor granted a faculty to allow the ashes to be buried in the family grave. [Re St. James West Dean [2022] ECC Glo 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Andrew Netherton [2022] ECC Wor 5 Taking all the various factors of the case together, the Chancellor determined to grant a faculty to allow the petitioners’ father’s ashes to be buried with the ashes of his wife next to other family members whose remains were buried in the cemetery. [Re St. Andrew Netherton [2022] ECC Wor 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Margaret Stratton [2022] ECC Bri 2* The petitioner wished to exhume the ashes of her father, so that part of his ashes could be interred with the retained portion of her mother’s ashes in Latvia. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty: there was no evidence of the father’s desire to have his remains interred in Latvia, or any evidence that he wished his remains to be buried with his wife’s remains; there was no discussion at the time of his funeral about the possibility of moving his remains in the future; no enquiries had been made about the possibility of exhumation in the 27 years since he had died; there was no intention to create a family grave, but two separate graves; and no effort had been made to identify graves in Latvia. [Re St. Margaret Stratton [2022] ECC Bri 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Springwood Cemetery Allerton [2022] ECC Liv 1 Before her father’s death in 2015, the petitioner had found the task of looking after her parents too great. When her father died, the petitioner, in distress and haste, had his ashes interred in plot 734 in the cemetery, which was a family grave of his wife’s relatives. Afterwards, the petitioner felt she had made the wrong decision and she purchased plot 1425 close by. The Chancellor decided that the circumstances were such as to justify the grant of a faculty to allow the exhumation of the petitioner’s father’s ashes and their re-interment with his wife’s ashes. [Re Springwood Cemetery Allerton [2022] ECC Liv 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Andrew Cherry Hinton [2022] ECC Ely 6 The petitioner was 18 when her brother committed suicide in 1988. At that time the Roman Catholic Church, of which the family were members, would not perform the burial, and so the deceased was buried in the churchyard of the Anglican church in Cherry Hinton. Following her mother’s death, the petitioner did not wish her mother to be buried in Cherry Hinton, but wished to have her buried in a cemetery in a triple-depth grave where the exhumed remains of her brother could be reinterred by a Roman Catholic priest, who was willing to perform the reinterment, and where the petitioner could be buried in due course. The Chancellor granted a faculty. [Re St. Andrew Cherry Hinton [2022] ECC Ely 6] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Widnes Cemetery [2022] ECC Liv 2 Before the death of the petitioner’s mother, a family grave had been surrounded with edging stones, and it had been anticipated that the deceased’s cremated remains would be interred in the family grave, but they were in fact interred between the edging stones and the adjacent path. The Chancellor decided that an error or misunderstanding had occurred, which, combined with the prompt request for rectification, amounted to an exceptional circumstance which would justify the grant of a faculty for exhumation and re-interment as requested. [Re Widnes Cemetery [2022] ECC Liv 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Margaret and All Hallows Orford [2022] ECC Liv 1* The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty to permit the exhumation of the petitioner’s grandfather’s cremated remains from the churchyard at Orford and re-interment in the grave of his wife in Warrington Cemetery. No sufficient exceptional circumstances had been shown: the petitioner’s grandfather had died 18 months after his wife had been buried in the cemetery and the family (who said that they had mistakenly thought that his remains could not be buried in the same grave as his wife, who had been a Roman Catholic) had decided to have his remains buried in Orford churchyard; a long period of time (21 years) had elapsed since his death; and there was no support for the exhumation from the parish. [Re St Margaret & All Hallows Orford [2022] ECC Liv 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Margaret and All Hallows Orford [2021] ECC Liv 5* The petitioner wished to have the cremated remains of her father, who died in 2000, exhumed from Orford churchyard and reinterred in the grave of her mother The Chancellor decided that there were no exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty: the issue as to where the petitioner’s father could be buried could have been decided shortly after his death; a long period had elapsed since the interment; and there was no support for the exhumation from the parish. [Re St. Margaret & All Hallows Orford [2021] ECC Liv 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Beverley Pamela Wilson deceased [2021] ECC Car 4 * The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty to have the cremated remains of the Petitioner’s daughter exhumed from a grave in Parkside Road Cemetery, Kendal and reinterred with the remains of the petitioner’s recently deceased father in another grave in the same cemetery. [Re Beverley Pamela Wilson deceased [2021] ECC Car 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Unlawful burial

Re All Saints Pontefract [2022] ECC Lee 6 The issue of an unlawful burial was resolved by a successful application to the Privy Council for an amendment to the 1857 Order in Council, so as to permit an exception allowing the interment in the churchyard of the human remains recovered from the site of the former Friary, and by the Deputy Chancellor granting a confirmatory faculty for the interments. [Re All Saints Pontefract [2022] ECC Lee 6] [Post] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Errors in burial

Re St Mary the Virgin Rowner [2021] ECC Por 4 The petitioner wished to exhume the cremated remains of her mother and reinter them in the same churchyard with the remains of her father. The Chancellor held that a mistake had been made, in that those digging the mother’s grave should have been aware that a double plot was required and granted a faculty.  [Re St. Mary the Virgin Rowner [2021] ECC Por 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Tow Law Cemetery [2022] ECC Dur 1 The daughter of the deceased sought disinterment of the remains of her father, who died in 2010, from Tow Law municipal cemetery, and their subsequent re-burial in unconsecrated land owned by the family opposite the family home at about 11 miles from Tow Law cemetery [1]. After the petition was issued, the petitioner’s mother, the widow of the deceased, applied to be added as a petitioner and was added as a party [3]. No objections were received following the public notice, and the Bereavement Services Co-ordinator for Durham County Council, confirmed that the local authority had no objections to the petition [4]. He informed the registry by email that the grounds for the petition were:

“…based on a mistake at the time of burial, I think the family at that time, did not know home burial existed, and have recently found out it could happen, if they had known this, I believe a home burial would have taken place…”.

The Chancellor did not regard the reason given as amounting to a mistake, within the meaning of ‘mistake’ as discussed in the guidelines given by the Court of Arches in Re Blagdon Cemetery [2002] Fam 299, which might justify exhumation. He also pointed out that the petitioners had not addressed the issue of care for the proposed grave on private land. [Re Tow Law Cemetery [2022] ECC Dur 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Streatham Park Cemetery [2022] ECC Swk 1 The Chancellor granted a faculty for an exhumation and re-interment in circumstances where, owing to an administrative error, a deceased’s remains had been buried in the wrong grave. [Re Streatham Park Cemetery [2022] ECC Swk 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Benton Cemetery [2022] ECC New 2 Owing to an administrative error on the part of the burial authority, cremated remains had not been buried in the grave purchased by the deceased, but in a grave already containing the cremated remains of a married couple. The Chancellor determined that the exceptional circumstances justified the grant of a faculty for exhumation and re-interment. [Re Benton Cemetery [2022] ECC New 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Other

Re St Andrew Horbling [2022] ECC Lin 2 The Chancellor granted a faculty authorising a trench to be dug from the petitioner’s father’s grave to the grave space behind, so that the coffin could then be slid into the new position [“coffin sliding”]. The Chancellor emphasised the importance of an up to date and accurate churchyard plan being kept in the church. [Re St. Andrew Horbling [2022] ECC Lin 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Shinfield Cemetery [2022] ECC Oxf 1 The petitioner’s maternal grandmother had been buried in grave space 951 in Shenfield Cemetery in 2006. The ashes of her grandfather had been buried in the same grave in 2009. The petitioner was granted permission for the temporary exhumation of her grandfather’s ashes, to facilitate the burial of her mother’s body in the same grave as her parents, with the ashes of the petitioner’s grandfather then being reinterred in the grave. The Chancellor said: “I also consider that the alternative test, formerly laid down and applied in Re Christ Church, Alsager [1999] Fam 142, of the existence of a good and proper reason for exhumation which most right-thinking members of the Anglican church would regard as acceptable, is also satisfied.” [Re Shenfield Cemetery [2022] ECC Oxf 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Parkwood Cemetery Waterhouses [2022] ECC Dur 2 The petitioner wished to have the body of her 15 year old daughter, who had committed suicide in 2018, exhumed and cremated. The Chancellor, applying the principles laid down in Re Blagdon Cemetery [2002] Fam 299, determined that the petitioner had failed to prove that there were exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty for exhumation. [Re Parkwood Cemetery Waterhouses [2022] ECC Dur 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Aycliffe West Cemetery [2022] ECC Dur 3 The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty for the exhumation of the cremated remains of the Petitioners father’s the scattering of the ashes with the ashes of the petitioner’s mother (recently deceased) at a favourite spot in the Lake District. The petitioners could not argue that there had been a mistake in dealing with their father’s ashes as they and their mother had agreed to interment in the Cemetery. A change of mind as to a place of burial did not amount to an exceptional circumstance. The proposal to scatter the ashes was an additional reason for refusing a faculty. [Re Aycliffe West Cemetery [2022] ECC Dur 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re East Finchley Cemetery [2022] ECC Lon 1 The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty for the exhumation of the remains of his grandparents and great aunt, who died in 1921, 1951 a 1954 respectively, in order that the remains might be cremated and scattered in Golders Green Cemetery. The application was “far outside of the exceptions to the general and important rule in the leading case of Re Blagdon Cemetery [2002] Fam 299. [Re East Finchley Cemetery [2022] ECC Lon 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Peter Ireleth [2022] ECC Car 1 The petitioner wished to have the remains of her late husband exhumed from the churchyard of the parish church of St. Peter Ireleth and reinterred in another plot in the same churchyard. The Deputy Chancellor determined that there were no sufficiently exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty for exhumation. Whilst access might be inconvenient, it was not unsafe and the difficulties were not likely to be long-lasting. [Re St. Peter Ireleth [2022] ECC Car 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Heaton Cemetery [2022] ECC New 1 The petitioner wished to have the cremated remains of his mother moved from one consecrated plot in the cemetery to another consecrated plot in the same cemetery, due to the proximity of skips to accommodate rubbish. The Chancellor therefore granted a faculty for exhumation and reinterment. [Re Heaton Cemetery [2022] ECC New 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Michael D. Niles, Deceased [2022] ECC Man 2 The family of Michael Niles (the deceased’) moved from the UK to live in the USA when the deceased was young. For a reason not explained in the judgment, the deceased was deported several years ago to the UK. The Chancellor considered that there were exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty. If the family had been aware of the deceased’s death at the time, they would have had his body cremated in the UK and the ashes sent to the USA for burial, believing that this would have been the deceased’s wish. [Re Michael D. Niles, Deceased [2022] ECC Man 2] [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re City of London Cemetery [2022] ECC Chd 3 The petitioner, the son of a Ghanaian, sought a faculty to authorize the exhumation of his father’s remains, with a view to the remains being re-interred in a grave in his father’s home town in Ghana. The deceased, aged 98, had during his lifetime expressed a wish to be buried in his home town. However, he died suddenly from Covid-19 in 2020, and owing to Covid restrictions the family had been advised that expeditious burial in a sealed, zinc-lined coffin was advised, and transfer to Ghana was then impossible. The Chancellor decided that, in the unusual circumstances of this case, the petitioner had demonstrated exceptional circumstances to displace the normal presumption that burial in consecrated ground is final, and she therefore granted a faculty. [Re City of London Cemetery [2022] ECC Chd 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary the Virgin Stoneleigh [2022] ECC Cov 7 In 2000 the petitioner’s mother died and, in accordance with a wish expressed in her will, her body was interred in a double-depth grave in Stoneleigh churchyard. In 2021 the petitioner’s mother’s partner died and his body was interred, in accordance with a wish in his own will, in the same grave. The petitioner now applied for her mother’s partner’s body to be exhumed and reinterred elsewhere, so that the petitioner could be buried in the same grave as her mother in due course. The Chancellor determined that there had been nothing unlawful in the burial of the partner and the petitioner had shown no exceptional circumstances to justify an exhumation. [Re St. Mary the Virgin Stoneleigh [2022] ECC Cov 7] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Bartholomew Arborfield [2022] ECC Oxf 7 The petitioners, who lived in Lincolnshire, wished to exhume from the churchyard of St. Bartholomew Arborfield in Oxfordshire the cremated remains of their son and only child, who died aged 6 from leukemia in 1981. The Chancellor considered that special circumstances existed which constituted good and proper reasons for making an exception to the normal rule that Christian burial was final. [Re St. Bartholomew Arborfield [2022] ECC Oxf 7] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Stourport Town Cemetery [2022] ECC Wor 8 The Chancellor granted a faculty to authorise the exhumation of the remains of the petitioner’s father and re-interment after the removal of some jewellery, which, owing to a mistake by the funeral directors, had been included in the interment, contrary to the wishes of the family. [Re Stourport Town Cemetery [2022] ECC Wor 8] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Northfleet Cemetery [2022] ECC Roc 2 A baby had died about an hour after its birth and the parents arranged for it to be buried in Northfleet Cemetery. They afterwards regretted their hasty decision to have the baby buried. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to conditions that the cremated remains should be interred in consecrated ground within 10 years, and until interment the cremated remains should be retained in a respectful and careful manner. Re Northfleet Cemetery [2022] ECC Roc 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

[2021 judgments] [2020 judgments] [2019 judgments] [2018 judgments] [2017 judgments] [2016 Judgments] [2015 Judgments] [2014 Judgments]

Churchyards and burials

Development of churchyard

Re St Michael and All Angels Foulridge [2022] ECC Bla 1 Faculty granted in March 2021 for sale of surplus land adjoining the church, together with diocesan land, to a housing developer. In September 2021, a further faculty application was made for permission to create a temporary compound for the developer on part of the churchyard where there were no marked graves. Faculty granted despite Party Opponent. [Re St. Michael & All Angels Foulridge [2022] ECC Bla 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Holy Trinity Pleshey [2022] ECC Chd 1 The priest-in-charge and churchwardens sought permission to reuse for burials three specific areas of the churchyard where there were no memorials and no evidence of recent burials. The Chancellor directed that areas 1 and 2 should be used first. The Chancellor added a number of other conditions to the grant of the faculty. [Re Holy Trinity Pleshey [2022] ECC Chd 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Ditchingham [2022] ECC Nor 2 The petitioners wished to re-lay and level the churchyard path using hot bitumen and gravel. This is a preliminary judgment containing directions for the petitioners and party opponent to make further submissions before a final decision by the Chancellor. infra. [Re St. Mary Ditchingham [2022] ECC Nor 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Ditchingham [2022] ECC Nor 3 The petitioners wished to re-lay and level the churchyard path using hot bitumen and gravel. The Chancellor determined that the proposed works were not inappropriate and he granted a faculty. [Re St. Mary Ditchingham [2022] ECC Nor 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Designation of closed churchyard

See Privy Council Business. 

[Back] [Top]

Churchyard Regulations

Re St Peter & St Paul Hambledon [2022] ECC Por 1 There was a disagreement between siblings as to the inscription to be included on the memorial for the grave of their parents, who had died within a short time of each other. The Chancellor considered that the additional words expressed immediate personal grief which it was not appropriate to include on a permanent memorial and they might “detract from the messages of love and care which the inscription would otherwise convey”; he therefore granted a faculty for the memorial with the wording proposed by the petitioner. [Re St. Peter & St. Paul Hambledon [2022] ECC Por 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Michael Langtoft [2022] ECC Lin 1 The petition proposed the addition of three names said to have been omitted from the First World War Memorial in Langtoft.  The Chancellor was not satisfied that the third name related to a different person from the one whose name was already on the memorial. Faculty refused. [Re St. Michael Langtoft [2022] ECC Lin 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Margaret Northam [2022] ECC Exe 2 The petitioner applied for approval of a memorial stone for the grave of his father, a former builder and stonemason, with inscriptions on both sides of the stone: on the front, the names and dates of birth and death of the deceased and the word ‘Beloved’; and on the back a quotation from a poem by Rudyard Kipling and an engraving of a trowel. The Chancellor determined that the design had artistic merit; that it would not establish a precedent, as there were already several stones in the churchyard with inscriptions on both sides; that the poem extract would look out of place on the front; and that the trowel was a symbol of the lifelong work of the deceased as a builder and stonemason, who had no connection with Freemasonry. Accordingly, the Chancellor granted a faculty. [Re St. Margaret Northam [2022] ECC Exe 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Edith Monk’s Kirby [2022] ECC Cov 1 Faculty granted for replacement os a severely damaged churchyard memorial, erected in about 1896, with a new memorial based upon the original design, which was not within the churchyards regulations. [Re St. Edith Monk’s Kirby [2022] ECC Cov 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. James Bushey [2022] ECC StA 1 The Chancellor granted a faculty, authorising the memorial with the compromise wording suggested by the petitioner, which would give both the married name and  maiden name of the daughter, to show the link between her and her parents. [Re St. James Bushey [2022] ECC StA 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. John the Baptist Baginton [2022] ECC Cov 2 The petitioners wished to erect a headstone on the grave of their uncle. As there were already several other polished stones in the churchyard, and the image was appropriate to commemorate the life of the deceased, the Chancellor granted a faculty. [Re St. John the Baptist Baginton [2022] ECC Cov 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Giles Sheldon [2022] ECC Bir 1 The petitioner, acting as executor for her brother, wished his remains to be buried in their mother’s grave and for the existing memorial to their mother to be replaced with a memorial to mother and son. The Chancellor decided that a change should not be made to a grave if it would give rise to family discord. He therefore refused to grant a faculty. [Re St. Giles Sheldon [2022] ECC Bir 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Darton [2022] ECC Lee 2 The incumbent and Parochial Church Council (“PCC”) objected to the Petitioner’s proposal. To accommodate and support the PCC’s policy, the Chancellor settled an inscription five lines long, which he would find acceptable. He allowed the petitioner 28 days in which to decide whether to accept the inscription, in which case a faculty would be granted. If the petitioner did not accept the inscription, the petition would be dismissed. [Re All Saints Darton [2022] ECC Lee 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Andrew Great Staughton [2022] ECC Ely 3 The Chancellor agreed to the design of a memorial stone including an etching of two sailboards against a background of the sea, but refused to permit a black stone. Reversing an early decision, Re St. Andrew Great Staughton [2021] ECC Ely 3, he allowed the use of South African grey or Rustenburg grey stone. [Re St. Andrew Great Staughton [2022] ECC Ely 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. John the Evangelist Lawley [2022] ECC Lic 2 Family dispute over inscription and validity of will. Deputy Chancellor had to consider whether the inscription was appropriate, or whether there were sufficiently good reasons for removal and replacement of the memorial. He determined that the inscription was not inappropriate, and there was therefore no good reason to order the removal of the stone, simply because there had not been consultation with and unanimous agreement between all the siblings. [Re St. John the Evangelist Lawley [2022] ECC Lic 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. John Walsall Wood [2022] ECC Lic 3 The Deputy Chancellor had three matters to consider in relation to an application for a memorial to mark the grave in which the petitioner’s wife’s ashes were buried. He did not approve of the design of the proposed memorial, and considered that the wording of the version of the poem was ‘over personal and inappropriate’, but indicated that he would approve  ‘a more discrete monument with suitably revised wording’.  [Re St. John Walsall Wood [2022] ECC Lic 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Michael and All Angels Pelsall [2022] ECC Lic 6 The petitioner wished to install a memorial on her mother’s grave which did not conform to the churchyards regulations.  The Deputy Chancellor considered that there was no objection to the deceased’s maiden name being used, as it was the name known by those whom the deceased knew well, but he recommended that, to avoid confusion, both the married name and maiden name should be entered in the Burial Register and on the churchyard plan. [Re St. Michael and All Angels Pelsall [2022] ECC Lic 6] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Stamfordham [2022] ECC New 3 The petitioner wished to erect in the churchyard a memorial to his late wife. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty for the use of granite: it would look out of place amongst the existing sandstone memorials; and to allow granite could upset those already denied the opportunity of having granite, and might generate an expectation that granite could be permitted in future. [Re St. Mary Stamfordham [2022] ECC New 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re Holy Cross Moreton Morrell [2022] ECC Cov 5 The P-i-C sought a confirmatory faculty to retain the bench as painted in rainbow colours, but the Chancellor was not persuaded by the arguments for their retention.[Re Holy Cross Moreton Morrell [2022] ECC Cov 5] [Post] [Top of section] [Top of post].

Re St. Mary de Wyche Wychbold [2022] ECC Wor 6 The petitioner wished to purchase and install at his own expense a new Second World War Memorial of the same design as, and to replace, the existing memorial plaque. The Deputy Chancellor determined that, as the memorial was a public record, it ought to show the correct name. He therefore granted a faculty permitting an amendment to the existing memorial, if possible, failing which the memorial could be replaced with a replica showing the petitioner’s cousin’s name as “Kenneth L. Collins”. [Re St. Mary de Wyche Wychbold [2022] ECC Wor 6] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Leonard Old Langho [2022] ECC Bla 4 The Grade I church of St. Leonard Old Langho is closed and vested in the Churches Conservation Trust, but the churchyard remains the responsibility of the PCC. The vicar of the parish in which the church lies applied for a retrospective faculty to authorize the retention of two benches placed in the churchyard by persons unknown without the authority of a faculty or List B approval under the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules. The Chancellor granted a faculty, but stated that in future he would “expect any PCC to petition for the removal of any unauthorized benches which they may find within their churchyard, leaving it to the person or persons who placed each bench there to petition for its retention, and to justify their conduct in having proceeded without prior lawful authority.” [Re St. Leonard Old Langho [2022] ECC Bla 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Peter Bourton-on-Dunsmore [2022] ECC Cov 6 After the death of Mr. John Parnaby, his mother commissioned a memorial and was reimbursed the cost from Mr. Parnaby’s estate. The petitioner was Mr. Parnaby’s partner and had lived with him for 25 years. She was upset that her connection to Mr. Parnaby was not mentioned in the inscription on the stone and petitioned for permission to amend the inscription to refer to their relationship, but without any consultation with the Parnaby family, owing to a rift. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty, on the basis that, as stated by the Chancellor in the judgment in Re St. Giles Sheldon [2022] ECC Bir 1, ” … the Anglican teaching concerning graves is that they should not be a focus for discord and should not be disturbed unless there is clear reason that should happen”. [Re St. Peter Bourton-on-Dunsmore [2022] ECC Cov 6] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Middleton [2022] ECC Lee 3 The Deputy Chancellor was unhappy about many of the features of the memorial, which were outside the churchyards regulations, but in the exceptional circumstances of the family having been badly misled so many years ago, he granted a faculty. [Re St. Mary Middleton [2022] ECC Lee 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. John the Evangelist Staincross [2022] ECC Lee 4 A memorial was proposed for the grave of a child who had died aged 6. After consultation with the Archdeacon, the Deputy Chancellor decided to grant a faculty for the stone and kerbs, provided that there would be no slab and no chippings. There were already several graves with kerbstones in the churchyard, and the memorial proposed would be in the far corner of the churchyard, where it would only be seen by people visiting that area. [Re St. John the Evangelist Staincross [2022] ECC Lee 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Paul Shadwell [2022] ECC Lee 8 The petitioner sought retrospective permission for the introduction of concrete kerbs and pebbles to the grave of her parents. The Deputy Chancellor refused to grant a confirmatory faculty and ordered that the kerbs and pebbles should be removed. [Re St. Paul Shadwell [2022] ECC Lee 8] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Leonard Minety [2022] ECC Bri 4 The Chancellor permitted the amendment of the Churchyards Regulations in relation to the marking of interments of cremated, applicable solely to the parish of Minety. [Re St. Leonard Minety [2022] ECC Bri 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Nicholas Earls Croome [2022] ECC Wor 9 The petitioner wished to install a kerbed memorial in the churchyard. The Chancellor granted a faculty (subject to conditions about the height of the kerbs) for the following reasons put forward by the family. [Re St. Nicholas Earls Croome [2022] ECC Wor 9] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Cuthbert Etherley [2022] ECC Dur 5 The petitioner sought permission to inter the cremated remains of her mother in a grave containing the remains of two members of the family; she also wished to replace the existing worn memorial. The Chancellor granted a faculty for the interment of the cremated remains, but refused to grant a faculty for the proposed memorial as too many of its features were outside the Churchyards Regulations. [Re St. Cuthbert Etherley [2022] ECC Dur 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Great Chart [2022] ECC Can 2 The petitioner wished to install a replacement memorial on his parents’ grave. The design included images of a dove, a stairway to heaven and two swans. The inscription included a verse of poetry written by the petitioner’s daughter and it ended with an x, the symbol of a kiss. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to a condition that the x should be omitted from the inscription. [Re St. Mary Great Chart [2022] ECC Can 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Reservation of grave space

Re St. Kenelm Romsley 3 [2022] ECC Wor 3 The petitioner wished to reserve a grave ‘until I die’. The Chancellor granted a faculty, but only for a term of 25 years, to provide certainty to the church as to the period of reservation. The Chancellor pointed out that, if at the end of the 25 years the petitioner wished to continue to reserve the space, an application could be made for an extension. [Re St. Kenelm Romsley [2022] ECC Wor 3] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Kenelm Romsley [2022] ECC Wor 4 The petitioner wished to reserve a grave ‘until I die’. The Chancellor granted a faculty, but only for a term of 25 years, to provide certainty to the church as to the period of reservation. The Chancellor pointed out that, if at the end of the 25 years the petitioner wished to continue to reserve the space, an application could be made for an extension. [Re St. Kenelm Romsley [2022] ECC Wor 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Thame [2022] ECC Oxf 2 The petitioner wished to reserve a double grave for herself and her partner. The normal period allowed for reservation of a grave in the diocese was 25 years, but evidence suggested that there was room for further burials only for a further 7 to 10 years. The Chancellor granted a faculty, but limited it to 10 years, giving permission to the petitioner to apply for an extension within 6 months of the expiry of the 10 years.  [Re St. Mary Thame [2022] ECC Oxf 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St Mary and St Radegund Postling [2021] ECC Can 1 Chancellor granted priest permission to reserve a grave space, despite PCC objection. Whilst weight should always be given to such a PCC policy, but this could not override the discretion of the Chancellor, should an exceptional case arise such as this. [Re St. Mary & St. Radegund Postling[2021] ECC Can 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. George Fatfield [2021] ECC Dur 4 The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty to the petitioners, husband and wife, wished to reserve a grave in the churchyard. They did not live in the parish or regularly attend the church, and therefore did not have a legal right to be buried in the churchyard.  [Re St. George Fatfield [2021] ECC Dur 4[] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. George Fatfield [2021] ECC Dur 5 The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty to the petitioners, husband and wife, wished to reserve a grave in the churchyard. They did not live in the parish or regularly attend the church, and therefore did not have a legal right to be buried in the churchyard.  [Re St. George Fatfield [2021] ECC Dur 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Bartholomew Areley Kings [2022] ECC Wor 2 The Chancellor determined that the pastoral reasons given for allowing the proposal were sufficient to justify permission being granted for the erection of the monument. [Re St. Bartholomew Areley Kings [2022] ECC Wor 2] [Back] [Top]

Re St. Mark Ocker Hill Tipton [2022] ECC Lic 4 The Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty for the reservation of a grave space for 20 years, rather than for the customary 50 years. In view of the number of spaces available and the rate of interments, the graveyard could be full and closed before a longer reservation would need to be exercised. The Chancellor gave the petitioner leave to apply for an extension of the period of 20 years within six months of its expiry. [Re St. Mark Ocker Hill Tipton [2022] ECC Lic 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mark Ocker Hill Tipton (2) [2022] ECC Lic 5 The Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty for the reservation of a double depth grave space for the period of 50 years usually allowed. He distinguished this case from Re St. Mark Ocker Hill Tipton [2022] ECC Lic 4, where he limited the reservation for 20 years, because the graveyard could be full and closed before a longer reservation would need to be exercised; in the present case, one of the joint petitioners was terminally ill, so that the double plot would be in use quite soon. [Re St. Mark Ocker Hill Tipton (2) [2022] ECC Lic 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Mary Magdalene Bolney [2022] ECC Chi 4 The petitioner, who did not live in the parish and therefore had no legal right to be buried in it, wished to reserve a double depth grave in the churchyard for himself and his wife, Since 2021 the parish had had a policy of not approving further grave reservations, as the churchyard was likely to be full within about six years, the Chancellor felt it would be unfair to override the parish policy and refused to grant a faculty. [Re St. Mary Magdalene Bolney [2022] ECC Chi 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. James the Apostle Newchapel [2022] ECC Lic 7 As it was clear that there had been a number of departures from the churchyard regulations and the memorial proposed was in keeping with those departures, and the irregular shape of the memorial appeared elsewhere and nearby, the Chancellor decided that it would be harsh to deny the erection of a similar stone. He therefore granted a faculty. [Re St. James the Apostle Newchapel [2022] ECC Lic 7] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Trees

Re St. Joseph and St. James Follifoot [2022] ECC Lee 1 The Chancellor granted a faculty of the felling and root removal of a holly tree, and the repair of a collapsed section of the churchyard wall, subject to replacement planting in the churchyard. [Re St. Joseph & St. James Follifoot [2022] ECC Lee 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. James Southbroom [2022] ECC Sal 2 Faculty granted for felling twelve hornbeam trees lining the path to the south porch of the church; benefits of the proposal deemed to outweigh the loss of amenity and she accordingly granted a faculty. [Re St. James Southbroom [2022] ECC Sal 2] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Isley Walton [2022] ECC Lei 1 In 2020, a local authority tree expert had recommended that one yew tree should be felled and the other pollarded. The Parochial Church Council decided that both trees should be felled and replaced with yews. But subsequently, one tree was felled and the other pollarded. A formal complaint was made that the Archdeacon had erroneously allowed the felling of the first tree pursuant to List B of the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules. The second tree was later felled. The Chancellor decided that the first tree had been in rapid decline due to decay,  that it was appropriate for it to be removed, and it had been appropriate for the Archdeacon to deal with the matter under List B; the second tree was dying and/or dangerous, and there would have been a case for the Archdeacon granting a List B consent. The Chancellor granted a retrospective faculty for the removal of the trees, subject to conditions. [Re All Saints Isley Walton [2022] ECC Lei 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Peter & St. Paul Shorne [2022] ECC Roc 1 The Chancellor granted a faculty for the inscription (with minor amendments) and the etching, but not for the kerbs, which were not permitted by the churchyard regulations. The fact that some kerbs had been place unlawfully in the churchyard did not justify allowing further kerbs. [Re St. Peter & St. Paul Shorne [2022] ECC Roc 1] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. Nicholas Tackley [2022] ECC Oxf 4 The Commonwealth War Graves Commission wished to erect a standard  Commission memorial in the churchyard, in memory of a serviceman murdered in Ireland in 1921. The Chancellor decided that it was appropriate to allow a memorial to the deceased soldier, even though the exact location of his buried remains was not known. At the top of the memorial, the words “Buried elsewhere in this churchyard” would be inscribed. The Chancellor also considered that there would be no good reason, in terms of pastoral sensitivities, to disallow the memorial. The location of the soldier’s death (Ireland) would not be mentioned on the memorial. Moreover, a memorial commemorates the individual, not the circumstances in which he died. [Re St. Nicholas Tackley [2022] ECC Oxf 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Environmental Permit

Parochial Church Council of St Thomas a Becket Church, Lovington, BA7 7PY.

The Environment Agency has received a new bespoke application for an environmental permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016, 26 April 2022. Application number: EPR/WB3791WJ/A001; Grid reference: ST 59690 30826. This is for the discharge of 0.5 cubic metres per day to groundwater at Location via a trench arch system.

Ecclesiastical Parish of the Offchurch Group: environmental permit application advertisement, CV33 9AS. The Environment Agency has received a new bespoke application for an environmental permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016, (22 June 2022). Application number: EPR/VB3690EQ/A001; Grid reference: SP 35808 65664. This is for the discharge of 0.15 cubic metres per day to groundwater via a trench arch system.

Parochial Church Council of St Bridget’s Church, Brigham, Cockermouth; Environmental permit application advertisement, CA13 0XH. (20 September 2022). The Environment Agency has received a new bespoke application for an environmental permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016 from the Parochial Church Council of St Bridget’s. Application number EPR/YB3490RF/A001; Grid reference NY 08577 30921. This is for the discharge of 0.08 cubic metres per day to groundwater via a trench arch system.

[2021 judgments] [2020 judgments] [2019 judgments] [2018 judgments] [2017 judgments] [2016 Judgments] [2015 Judgments] [2014 Judgments]

Organs [2]

Re St. Lawrence Aldfield [2022] ECC Lee 5 The rector and church treasurer sought retrospective permission for works already carried out to the organ, including treatment of woodworm, cleaning of pipework, fitting two new sets of sliding tuners, and asbestos removal from the blower. The Deputy Chancellor, emphasizing the need to seek formal approval for works, even in urgent cases, granted a faculty. [Re St. Lawrence Aldfield [2022] ECC Lee 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

See Re St. Lawrence Eyam. supra.

Re St. Laurence Combe [2022] ECC Oxf 5 Petition granted for removal of redundant pipe organ, eight pews (to be replaced with chairs) and a number of items of redundant church furniture, in order to create a flexible circulation area at the back of the church. [Re St. Laurence Combe [2022] ECC Oxf 5] [Top of section] [Top of post]

[2021 judgments] [2020 judgments] [2019 judgments] [2018 judgments] [2017 judgments] [2015 Judgments] [2014 Judgments] [Top]

Bells [4]

Re A Redundant Church Bell [2021] ECC Oxf 11 The petitioners sought to display a redundant treble church bell, dating from the 1630s, at the base of the church tower, notwithstanding the risk that it may be stolen from the church, which was left open during the day. Chancellor  gave the petitioners to choice of retaining the redundant bell on display either on the ground floor or on the first floor of the tower. [Re A Redundant Church Bell [2021] ECC Oxf 11] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Rotherham [2022] ECC She 8 The Chancellor granted a faculty for “the installation of a sharp second bell in order to create a true light octave of the front eight bells in the bell tower.” All Saints, otherwise known as Rotherham Minster, is Grade I, but the Chancellor was satisfied that the works would not affect the ancient structure or the architectural or the historical significance of the building. [Re All Saints Rotherham [2021] ECC She 8] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re All Saints Stranton [2022] ECC Dur 4 Faculty granted for restoration and retuning the church’s eight bells. The Church Buildings Council (‘CBC’) opposed the retuning of the 6th bell, as it was thought to predate 1600. [Re All Saints Stranton [2022] ECC Dur 4] [Top of section] [Top of post]

Re St. James Church Kirk [2022] ECC Bla 3 The petitioner, the Senior Church Buildings Officer for the Diocese of Blackburn, proposed the removal of the eight bells from the redundant church of St. James Church Kirk, and their re-installation in the church of St. Cuthbert Over Kellet. The Chancellor granted a faculty; he considered that the consistory court should favour a proposal that would “lead to bells being rung to signify the presence of a worshiping church in the community, and to invite local people to worship there, over one that does not”. [Re St. James Church Kirk [2022] ECC Bla 3] [Post] [Top of section] [Top of post]

[2021 judgments] [2020 judgments] [2019 judgments] [2018 judgments] [2017 judgments] [2016 Judgments] [2015 Judgments] [Top]

Privy Council Business

16 February 2022

  • Burial Act 1853 (Notice): Order giving notice of the discontinuance of burials in: 1. Part closure of St Cyr’s Church Churchyard, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire; 2. Churchyard of St. Luke’s, Matfield, Kent; 3. St Mary Magdalene Churchyard, Bildeston, Suffolk; 4. St Peter and St Paul Rustington Parish Churchyard, Rustington, West Sussex.
  • Burial Act 1853 (Final) Order prohibiting further burials in: 1. Octagon Church Churchyard, Wisbech, Cambridgeshire; 2. Part closure of All Saints Churchyard, Lydalls Road, Didcot, Oxfordshire; 3. St John the Baptist Churchyard, Marldon, Devon; 4. Corley Parish Churchyard, Church Lane, Corley, Coventry, Warwickshire; 5. Churchyard of St. James’ Church, Thornes, Wakefield, West Yorkshire (formerly St James’ with Christ Church, Wakefield); 6. St John’s Church Churchyard, Skipton on Swale, Thirsk, North Yorkshire.
  • Burial Act 1855: Order giving notice of varying the Order dated 10th November 2021 concerning further burials in St Peter Churchyard, Blackley, Manchester. This referred to a submission that:

“the Order dated 10th November 2021 should be varied with respect to the Churchyard of St Peter, Blackley, Manchester, to remove the exceptions listed in that Order and for burials to be discontinued entirely in the Churchyard of St Peter, Blackley, Manchester“.

16 March 2022

  • Burial Act 1853 (Notice): Order giving notice of the discontinuance of burials in: St Michael and All Angels Old Churchyard, Loddiswell, Devon.
  • Burial Act 1853 (Final): Order prohibiting further burials in: St John the Evangelist Churchyard, Sewerby, East Yorkshire.

13 April 2022

  • Burial Act 1853 (Notice): Order giving notice of the discontinuance of burials in: St James the Great Churchyard, Idridgehay and Alton Parish, Belper, Derbyshire; St Mary the Virgin Church Churchyard, Higher Brixham, Devon; St Philip & St James Churchyard, Markfield Road, Groby, Leicester, Leicestershire; St Dunstan’s Cheam Churchyard, Cheam, Sutton, Surrey; St Barnabas Churchyard, Ranskill, Nottinghamshire; St Mark’s Lower Churchyard, Longwood, Huddersfield, West Yorkshire; and St Luke’s Church Churchyard, Duston, Northampton, Northamptonshire.
  • Burial Act 1853 (Final): Order prohibiting further burials in: St Cyr’s Church Churchyard, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire (Part closure); Churchyard of St Luke’s, Matfield, Kent; St Mary Magdalene Churchyard, Bildeston, Suffolk;  St Peter and St Paul Rustington Parish Churchyard, Rustington, West Sussex; and St Peter Churchyard, Blackley, Manchester.

11 May 2022

  • Burial Act 1853 (Notice): Order giving notice of the discontinuance of burials in: All Saints Church Churchyard, Cadney, Brigg, Lincolnshire; St Paul’s Churchyard, Lindale and Newton in Cartmel, Lindale, Grange over Sands, Cumbria; and St Michael’s Churchyard, Holbrook, Derbyshire.
  • Burial Act 1853 (Final) Order) prohibiting further burials in: St Michael and All Angels Old Churchyard, Loddiswell, Devon.

6 June 2022

  • Burial Act 1853 (Notice): Order giving notice of the discontinuance of burials in: Becconsall Old Church Churchyard, Hesketh Bank, Preston, Lancashire; Holy Trinity Churchyard, Thorpe Hesley, Rotherham, Yorkshire; St James’s Churchyard, Biddenham, Bedfordshire; St John the Baptist Church Churchyard, Great Gaddesden, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire; All Saints Parish Church Churchyard, Headley, Bordon, Hampshire.
  • Burial Act 1853 (Final): Order prohibiting further burials in: St James the Great Churchyard, Idridgehay and Alton Parish, Belper, Derbyshire; St Mary the Virgin Church Churchyard, Higher Brixham, Devon; St Philip & St James Churchyard, Markfield Road, Groby, Leicester, Leicestershire; St Dunstan’s Cheam Churchyard, Cheam, Sutton, Surrey; St Barnabas Churchyard, Ranskill, Nottinghamshire; St Mark’s Lower Churchyard, Longwood, Huddersfield, West Yorkshire; St Luke’s Church Churchyard, Duston, Northampton, Northamptonshire.

The Accession Council, 10 September 2022

List of those present at the Accession Council

12 October 2022

  • Burial Act 1853 (Notice): Order giving notice of the discontinuance of burials in: All Saints Church Churchyard, Beckingham, Doncaster, South Yorkshire; St Mary’s Church Churchyard, Rickinghall Superior, Suffolk; St Mark’s Church Churchyard, Eldon, Bishop Auckland, County Durham; St John the Baptist & St Helen Churchyard, Wroughton, Swindon; and  St Mary and All Saints Church Churchyard, Stoughton, Leicester, Leicestershire.
  • Burial Act 1853 (Final) Order prohibiting further burials in: Becconsall Old Church Churchyard, Hesketh Bank, Preston, Lancashire; Holy Trinity Churchyard, Thorpe Hesley, Rotherham, Yorkshire; St James’s Churchyard, Biddenham, Bedfordshire; St John the Baptist Church Churchyard, Great Gaddesden, Hemel Hempstead  Hertfordshire; All Saints Parish Church Churchyard, Headley, Bordon, Hampshire; Cheveley Churchyard Extension, St Mary & The Holy Host of Heaven, Cheveley, Cambridgeshire (also known as The Old Cemetery; St Chad’s Church Churchyard, Draycott, Derbyshire; St Peter’s Churchyard, Frimley, Surrey.
  • Burial Act 1855 (Variation). Order varying an Order dated 20th March 1857 prohibiting further burials in All Saints Churchyard, Pontefract, West Yorkshire
    (referred to in the 1857 Order as “the old parish churchyard”).

“His Majesty, in the exercise of His powers under section 1 of the Burial Act 1855, by and with the advice of His Privy Council, is pleased to order as follows:—

Notwithstanding anything in the Order in Council made under the Burial Act 1853 on 20th March 1857, directing the discontinuance of burials in All Saints Churchyard, Pontefract, West Yorkshire (referred to in the 1857 Order as “the old parish churchyard”), the burial may be allowed of the unknown human remains from the 1340’s to 1390’s exhumed from the former St Richard’s Dominican Friary in the then disused site of Pontefract General Infirmary, within the burial ground of All Saints Churchyard, Pontefract, West Yorkshire.”

[This Order refers to the case of Re All Saints Pontefract [2022] ECC Lee 6 to be reviewed in the consistory court round-up]

9 November 2022

Seven Proclamations were issued, including:

  • Appointing Monday 8th May 2023 as a bank holiday in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to commemorate His Majesty’s Coronation;
  • Appointing Monday 8th May 2023 as a bank holiday in Scotland to commemorate His Majesty’s Coronation.

Also:

  • Burial Act 1853 (Notice): Order giving notice of the discontinuance of burials in: St John the Evangelist Church Churchyard, Goldenhill, Stoke on Trent, Staffordshire; and  St Michaels Churchyard, Stoke Gifford, Bristol.

The exceptions are that in St Michaels Churchyard, in any existing earthen grave in the churchyard, the burial may be allowed of the body of any member of the family of the person or persons previously buried in that grave, but no part of the coffin containing the body shall be less than one metre below the level of the surface of the ground adjoining the grave.

14 December 2022

  • Burial Act 1853 (Notice): Order giving notice of the discontinuance of burials in: St Alkmund’s Churchyard, Duffield, Derbyshire; Saint Nicolas Church Churchyard, Kings Norton, Birmingham, West Midlands; and St Thomas Churchyard, Rotherham, South Yorkshire
  • Burial Act 1853 (Final) Order prohibiting further burials in: All Saints Church Churchyard, Beckingham, Doncaster, South Yorkshire; St Mary’s Church Churchyard, Rickinghall Superior, Suffolk; St Mark’s Church Churchyard, Eldon, Bishop Auckland, County Durham; St John the Baptist & St Helen Churchyard, Wroughton, Swindon, Wiltshire; and St Mary and All Saints Church Churchyard, Stoughton, Leicester, Leicestershire.

CDM Decisions and Safeguarding

A new policy for the publication of penalties by consent came into force on 24 October 2022 although there is a lacuna in the case of The Right Reverend Peter Hullah where the penalty was imposed before this date. The page on the CofE website Penalties by Consent records the penalties that have been imposed by a bishop or archbishop with the consent of the respondent under section 16 of the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 and penalties that have been imposed under section 30 or 31.

Penalties by consent

  • The Right Reverend Peter Hullah
    Date imposed: 1st August 2022
    Brief Summary: Sexual misconduct involving two different women on two separate occasions.
    Penalty: Prohibition for life.
  • The Revd PHIL GREIG
    Diocese: Canterbury
    Date imposed: 7th December 2022
    Relevant CDM section: 16(1)
    Statutory Ground of Misconduct: s.8(1)(d): Conduct unbecoming & inappropriate to the office and work of a clerk in Holy Orders
    Penalty: Limited prohibition for 4 years
  • The Revd SIMON MATTHEWS
    Diocese: Leicester
    Date imposed: 31st October 2022
    Relevant CDM section: 16(1)
    Statutory Ground of Misconduct: s.8(1)(d): Conduct unbecoming & inappropriate to the office and work of a clerk in Holy Orders
    Penalty: Limited prohibition for 1 year

CDM Decisions

  • Decision: Revd Dr Stephen Sizer. A  complaint made in 2018 by Mrs Marie van der Zyl, President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, alleging that Dr Sizer’s conduct was “unbecoming or inappropriate to the office and work of a clerk in Holy Orders within section 8(1)(d) of the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 in that he provoked and offended the Jewish community and/or engaged in anti-Semitic activity”. (6 December 2022).
Other statements &c
  • The Very Revd. Martyn Percy On 4 February 2022, statements were issued by the Diocese of Oxford and Christ Church.
  • The Revd Michael Todd Decision and Penalty, Bishop’s Disciplinary Tribunal, Diocese of Southwark, January 2022. [See post CDM Tribunal considers “liking” tweets, infra]
  • Church of England: Graham Gregory: Lessons Learnt Review. The independent “lessons learnt review” into the Church’s handling of allegations against the late Revd Graham Gregory across five dioceses; Gregory was sentenced to three years imprisonment in 2014, on two counts of non-recent indecent assault and was further convicted in 2018 of three non-recent indecent assaults. He died in jail in 2019.
  • The Reverend Julian Blakeley Decision and Penalty, Bishop’s Disciplinary Tribunal, Diocese of York, January 2022. “[7]. His conduct was unbecoming or inappropriate to the office and work of a clerk in Holy Orders within Section 8(1)(d) of the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 in that in or around January 2011, during a telephone conversation with Person 1, he was insensitive by:
    (a) Adopting an aggressive tone; And by (b) Using the following words and/or phrases or words and/or phrases which were substantially similar …” .
  • The Revd Clive Roger Evans – March 2022
  • Diocese of Oxford: Safeguarding case review: Revd Michael Hall, Tylers Green. A safeguarding case review into allegations of spiritual abuse connected with St Margaret’s, Tylers Green, High Wycombe between 1981 and 2000.
  • Church in Wales: The Right Reverend June Osborne – Dismissal of complaint, April 2022. “Disciplinary action against the Bishop of Llandaff has come to an end following the withdrawal of a complaint against her. The Proctor, the lawyer tasked with presenting the complaint to the Tribunal, told the President that the Dean had “reached a clear and settled decision” to withdraw his complaint and there was “insufficient evidence to satisfy the burden of proof” to the required standard.” [Post].
  • William Scott Farrell review: Publication of independent overview report. The independent lessons learnt review of the recruitment and appointment of William Scott Farrell, who pleaded guilty and was jailed for sexual offences, some of which had children as the victim, has been published today. It can be viewed in full here, and the Terms of Reference here. These offences occurred while he was working at two cathedrals, and the review also looks at the handling of concerns raised at a third cathedral. (26 May 2022).
  • Scottish Episcopal Church: Bishop of Aberdeen & Orkney On 10 August 2022, it was announced that, after two formal complaints of alleged misconduct by the Rt Revd Anne Dyer, Bishop of Aberdeen & Orkney, the Primus had suspended her from office until further notice, following the commencement of a disciplinary process under Canon 54 of the Church’s Code of Canons.

    The process was to be considered in the first instance by the Preliminary Proceedings Committee, the Bishop of Edinburgh was also to serve as Acting Bishop of the Diocese of Aberdeen & Orkney during her suspension, and the independent mediation process set up last October in response to difficulties experienced in her diocese was expected to be put on hold pending the outcome of the disciplinary process.

    Later on the same day, however, it was announced that her suspension had been lifted with immediate effect after she gave notice of an appeal against the decision to the Episcopal Synod. It is expected that a meeting of the Episcopal Synod will be arranged as soon as possible.

  • CNC Central members election appeal decision in respect of the election of members of the Crown Nominations Commission by the Houses of Laity and Clergy of the General Synod, 25 October 2022.
  • Decision: Revd Dr Stephen Sizer.  A  complaint made in 2018 by Mrs Marie van der Zyl, President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, alleging that Dr Sizer’s conduct was “unbecoming or inappropriate to the office and work of a clerk in Holy Orders within section 8(1)(d) of the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 in that he provoked and offended the Jewish community and/or engaged in anti-Semitic activity”. (6 December 2022).

Reports from the Independent Reviewer

Individual Reports from the Independent Reviewer are to be found at House of Bishops’ Declaration on the Ministry of Bishops and Priests (Independent Reviewer).

Annual reports

Individual Reports from the Independent Reviewer

CFCE Determinations

15 December 2021

  • Cathedral Church of Christ, Canterbury: Replacement of exterior Floodlights. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of St Peter in Exeter: To deliver the second phase of Exeter Cathedral’s 2020’s Vision – Investing in Our Welcome project. The proposals include: Installation of new service routes (infrastructure cabling/electrical and data services, heating); Reordering works in the Chapel of St James, Quire, Quire Aisles, the former Vestries and Cathedral Shop.

Decision To defer determination of the proposals for the vestry area behind the high altar; To defer determination of the installation of services to the upper room of St James’s chapel pending further details of and justification; To approve the other elements of the application, subject to conditions.

  • Cathedral Church of St Peter in Exeter. To deliver the first phase of Exeter Cathedral’s 2020’s Vision – Investing in Our Welcome project. The proposals include: The Cloister Gallery; Reordering and extending the Pearson Cloister Building; Re-roofing and reordering the former vestries to the south of the Quire. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of St Peter and the Holy and Indivisible Trinity, Gloucester. To relocate existing Lady Chapel furniture and replace it with a set of new furniture designed by the Cathedral Architect. Gloucester Cathedral is applying for permission to create a new altar, base for the Lancaut Font, candle stand and lectern for the Lady Chapel Sanctuary. Furniture approved s.t.c.; Application for a new font base refused.
  • Cathedral Church of St Martin, Leicester: Record, lift, store and relay of floor to St George’s Chapel. Approved s.t.c..

Thursday 27 January 2022

  • Cathedral Church of Christ, Blessed Mary the Virgin and St Cuthbert of Durham. Loan of item to Metropole Rouen Normandie Museum of Fine Arts for exhibition, as follows: DCD 1.2.Spec.23* Charter of Matilda, with Seal. The charter with its Seal will be on show in a major international exhibition which beings together current research about the Normans to explore new viewpoints and questions. The item is currently stored in the Cathedral Archives at 5 the College, where it is available via the reading room but not on public display. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of Christ, Blessed Mary the Virgin and St Cuthbert of Durham. Loan of medieval stone sculptures to the Laing Art Gallery for display in the Lindisfarne Gospels exhibition, as follows: DURCL 17.2.28 ‘Berchgyd’ Grave marker (Hartlepool); DURCL 17.2.50 Cross shaft (Yarm). Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of Christ, Blessed Mary the Virgin and St Cuthbert of Durham. Loan of item to Durham University for exhibition, as follows: DCD 3.3.Pont.10. Grant by Cuthbert Tunstall, Bishop of Durham, with his Great Seal in Chancery. Approved subject to conditions. 

Thursday 24 March 2022

  • Cathedral Church of St Philip, Birmingham: Conservation of four Burne-Jones windows E, nII, sII, W, including cleaning, remedial work, detailed conservation work and replacement of existing protective grilles. Approved  the proposals for conservation including cleaning, remedial work, and detailed conservation work for the four windows. The Commission deferred determination on other proposed work.
  • Cathedral Church of Christ, Canterbury: To make permanent the swapping of two stained glass panels within the Miracle Window nIII after their temporary changeover for the British Museum exhibition in 2021. To make several other amendments to the glazing to allow for a harmonious reading of the window. Approved.
  • Cathedral Church of the Holy Trinity, Chichester: To install temporary cabins and grass protection as part of a seasonal Christmas Market from 25 November to 18 December 2022. Approved subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral Church of Holy and Undivided Trinity, Ely: A scheme to improve the lighting in the nave, chancel, aisles and chapels using new fittings and LED lamps. The existing scheme dates from 1994 and while it was a carefully designed scheme at the time, it is now dated and some cases, unusable. Approved.
  • Cathedral Church of St Peter in Exeter: The removal of the 20th Century sculptures from the Chapter House, their deaccessioning from the cathedral’s inventory, and their disposal. Approved subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral Church of the Holy Spirit, Guildford: To develop the land on Stag Hill in the vicinity of the Cathedral for the purposes of providing and endowment for the Cathedral and affordable and private housing for the community. Approved subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral of the Holy and Undivided Trinity of Norwich: To vary the condition 1 of the permission granted on 6th August 2021 for the loan of the Lyhart crosier to Norwich Castle Museum. Condition varied, subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral Church of Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary, Rochester: Installation, by Medway Council, of a second soakaway in the Precinct, Rochester. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary, Rochester: Replacement of the sound and vision installations within the cathedral. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary, Rochester:  External paving repairs and improvements. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Chapter of the Cathedral Church of York Minster: A ‘like for like’ repair of the historically significant tiled 1840’s Minton flooring to the Chapter House has been undertaken. Approved. 

Thursday 26 May 2022

  • The Cathedral Church of St Saviour and St Mary Overie, Southwark: The transfer of eight boxes of human skeletal material currently stored in the triforium cupboard to the Museum of London Centre for Osteoarchaeology, and one box of animal bone from the same excavations. Approved subject to condition “That prior to the removal of the skeletons from the cathedral, Chapter shall formally agree with the Museum of London a reasonable timeframe for the return of the skeletons to the cathedral for reinterment” -” to ensure that the remains are ultimately given a dignified reinterment”. 
  • The Cathedral Church of St Alban: To transport the collection of charters and a figure to the Hertford Archive studio for assessment only. Approved subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral Church of Christ and the Blessed Mary the Virgin, Worcester: A programme of repairs to the damaged vaulting in the North Quire Aisle, retaining the vault in place. Approved subject to conditions.

Thursday 21 July 2022

  • The Cathedral Church of Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary, Chester: Design of glass as part of the installation of the Pilgrim Porch. Approved subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral Church of Wells: Conservation works to the external clock. Approved subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral Church of St Peter in Exeter: Conservation works to the sedilia. Approved. 
  • Cathedral Church of St Peter in Exeter: Conservation works to the Scott presbytery floor. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary of Lincoln: To install ramps, gates and railings to the Galilee porch. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of St Mary the Virgin and Saint Ethelbert the King, Hereford: To package and move 11 manuscripts which require professional and considered conservation. Approved subject to conditions. 

8 September 2022

  • Cathedral Church of Christ, Canterbury. To conserve the damaged early 19th century frame surrounding the portrait of Dean William Friend (inventory number 02275.2). Approved.
  • Cathedral Church of Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary in Chester. Re-siting of historic Stuart font. Approved subject to conditions. 
  • Cathedral Church of St Peter in Exeter. To deliver the second phase of Exeter Cathedral’s 2020’s Vision – Investing in Our Welcome project. The proposals include: Installation of new service routes (infrastructure cabling/electrical and data services, heating); Reordering works in the Chapel of St James, Quire, Quire Aisles, the former Vestries and Cathedral Shop. The Commission decided to approve the deferred elements of the application.
  • Cathedral Church of St Peter and the Holy and Indivisible Trinity. Conservation and repair of two books: Lactantius (H.6.11), 1472; and Selden (SEL.1.3), 1652. The Commission determined to: approve the proposals for Lactantius; and defer determination of the proposals for Selden pending further information. 
  • The Cathedral Church of St Mary the Virgin and Saint Ethelbert the King, Hereford. Loan of the Romanesque capital Christ descent into Limbo to La Réunion des Musées Métropolitains, France. Approved subject to conditions.
  • The Cathedral Church of Christ in Liverpool. To install an echo organ in the north-east of the triforium. Approved subject to conditions.
  • The Cathedral of the Holy and Undivided Trinity of Norwich. Minor repair to processional cross (Inventory no. E11*).  Approved subject to conditions.
  • The Cathedral Church of St Paul, London. The removal of temporary City of London removable bollards on the public highway, directly to the southwest of the west steps, to be replaced by three PAS-rated removable security bollards of the same appearance. The new bollards will be on cathedral land, on the boundary of the precinct, aligned with the late 19th-century granite bollards around the forecourt perimeter. Approved subject to conditions.

3 November 2022

  • Cathedral Church of Christ, Canterbury. To install a new security arrangement to Mint Yard Gate following the approved demolition of Mitchinson’s House and garden wall. Summary of the nature of the work and its extent: External alterations to the existing Home Office compliant Hostile Vehicle Mitigation measures at Mint Yard Gate, including four new fixed bollards and a proposal to redecorate the security hut. Approved subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral Church of Wells. Conservation of the Strikers to the North Transept, North Elevation Exterior Clock Face. Approved subject to conditions.
  • Cathedral Church of York Minster. Retrospective consent for a temporary compound in the North Transept to 31st December 2030. Approved subject to conditions.

Visitations &c

Other

Diocese of London: Statement regarding police investigation: “… last year, the London Diocesan Fund (LDF) reported a past financial matter to the Police. The LDF has submitted historical information and has been supporting the authorities fully with their ongoing enquiries”.

[The LDF is the legal body that holds and manages the assets of the diocese (as distinct from parishes). It is called the Diocesan Board of Finance in many other dioceses.]

(25 May 2022).

Links to other posts

Recent summaries of specific issues that have been considered in the consistory courts include:

Heating

Church Treasures/Sale of Paintings &c/Memorials

Audio Visual Equipment

Exhumation

Organs

Bells

  • Removal of bells from a closed church. The cases of Re St James Church Kirk [2022] ECC Bla 3 which concerned a refurbished ring of eight bells at Over Kellet, for which the particular interest i lies in the requirements associated with making changes to a closed church, aspects of which still fall within the faculty jurisdiction. Also the earlier case  Re St James Church Kirk [2019] ECC Bla 4 which involved an initially interim loan of a much older but unringable bell from the same closed church to Lancashire Museum Services.

General/Miscellaneous

[Top]

Notes on the conventions used for the navigation between cases reviewed in this post are summarized here.

Cite this article as: David Pocklington, "Ecclesiastical court judgments – 2022" in Law & Religion UK, 31 December 2022, https://lawandreligionuk.com/2022/12/31/ecclesiastical-court-judgments-2022/

 

One thought on “Ecclesiastical court judgments – 2022”

  1. Pingback: An Index of L&RUK Posts – Consistory Court Judgments | Law & Religion UK

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *