Non-involvement with CDM proceedings (I)

Information for benefices

On 4 May 2026, The Marlpudlian – “The website for All Saints Church and the wider community” – posted “A Big Change at All Saints” in which it informed parishioners that “As of Tuesday 31st March 2026, the Revd Karen Padley is  no longer the vicar of All Saints church, nor is she priest-in-charge of the churches of St Lawrence Heanor, St Andrew’s Langley Mill and St John’s Aldercar”. It stated:

Revd Karen Padley has been removed from office as Priest in Charge of St Lawrence Heanor, St Andrew Langley Mill, and St John Aldercar, and Vicar of All Saints Marlpool, by an Independent Tribunal established under the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003, and is prohibited from ministering as a priest in the Church of England for three years.

The result of this is that these parishes are now in vacancy. During this time the responsibility for the continuation of ministry is assumed by the Churchwardens and the Area Dean, together with the assisting clergy of the parishes, who will be fully supported by the Acting Archdeacon of East Derbyshire and colleagues in the Parish Support Team.

The Diocese of Derby has offered pastoral and practical support …at this time.”

No further details (have) been made available to us at this time However, for the avoidance of any misunderstanding or erroneous assumptions it can be stated that: This decision was NOT as the result of any safeguarding issue or financial impropriety on the part of [the former incumbent]” (emboldening and capitalization in original).

Legal Issues

The subsequent post Non-involvement with CDM proceeding (II) addresses the Tribunals considerations, which observed (at [16] of the Determination) “We have found the Respondent’s (i.e. the former incumbent’s) behaviour to be puzzling and in the face of many opportunities to act otherwise, to have been disappointing in one tasked with important duties in her role“. This post will cover whether the hearing could proceed in the absence of the former incumbent and whether to grant an application for the drawing of an adverse inference due to non-attendance.

Comment

The Marlpudlian article acknowledged the associated disquiet which is often generated in events such as this. It stated:

“As you can appreciate, this sudden removal of our vicar came as something as a shock to the All Saints congregation. To date, nothing beyond the above statement has been published so unsurprisingly rumours abound. Until the ruling is published on the Church of England website[1] there is nothing we can add to the above statement”.


[1] The timeline of events is uncertain. The Determination and  Penalty are dated 7 January 2026 and 31 March 2026, respectively, although this does not necessarily reflect when the documents were placed in the public domain; they were not included in the L&RUK monthly reviews up to and including April 2026. The Marlpudlian article is dated 4 May 2026 although it commences with “As of Tuesday 31st March 2026…”.

Cite this article as: David Pocklington, "Non-involvement with CDM proceedings (I)" in Law & Religion UK, 11 May 2026, https://lawandreligionuk.com/2026/05/11/non-involvement-with-cdm-proceedings-i/

2 thoughts on “Non-involvement with CDM proceedings (I)

  1. However, the three years’ prohibition from ministry, imposed, seemingly by consent, on the Revd Russell Gant, reported in the East Anglian Daily Times on 4 February 2026: file:///C:/Users/djlam/OneDrive/Bishop&wardenltr.docx/Documents/EADT%204.2.2026.pdf page 10)
    has still not been added to the list of “CDM Penalties imposed (under sections: 16 | 30 | 31)” see: https://www.churchofengland.org/about/governance/legal-resources/clergy-discipline/cdm-penalties-imposed-under-sections-16-30-31

Leave a Reply

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