Judgments Recently Received
Click on a citation to view the judgment.
Re St. John the Evangelist Ranmoor [2025] ECC She 4
The petitioners wished to remove a four-legged black wrought iron stand installed in 1991 around the font, because it made it awkward to conduct baptisms and it also partly obscured a stained glass window in the baptistry, the only window in the church depicting women. The Chancellor, having inspected the frame, considering that it did inhibit movement around the font and that the benefit of removing the frame would outweigh any harm to the church interior. She therefore granted a faculty.
Re St. John the Evangelist Ranmoor [2025] ECC She 3
Extensive internal and external repairs to the tower and spire were urgently needed to protect people inside and outside the building from the risk of injury from falling masonry, to preserve the structural stability of the spire and to weatherproof and prevent water ingress to tower and spire. The Chancellor granted a faculty.
Re St. Michael the Archangel Warfield [2025] ECC Oxf 6
The petitioner wished to have her late husband buried in the grave of his first wife, which also contained the cremated remains of his first wife’s mother. In order for the burial to take place, it would be necessary for the cremated remains of the first wife’s mother to be temporarily exhumed and then returned to the same grave after the interment of the body of the petitioner’s husband. The Area Dean did not support the petition. He believed that exhumation would be contrary to the theological presumption of the permanence of Christian burial. The Chancellor, however, considered that there was case law which supported an exception to the normal presumption of permanence in these circumstances and he granted a faculty.
Re St. Martin Ryarsh [2025] ECC Roc 2
There were two applications to reserve grave spaces in a churchyard where there was space for only two to three more years of interments. In the first case, a man aged 54, who did not live in the parish and was not on the electoral roll, wished to reserve a grave for himself and his son aged 21. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty: “To grant a faculty for the time for which grave spaces will be available would be pointless; to grant one for longer would inevitably cause injustice to those with the right of interment in the churchyard who would consequently not be able to exercise that right.” In the second case, the petitioner, who was aged 85 and lived in the parish and attended the church, wished to reserve a double-depth grave for herself and her husband aged 88. After the petition was presented, the petitioner’s husband had died and was buried in the churchyard. However, the Chancellor stated that, had the petitioner’s husband not died, the Chancellor would have granted a faculty in view of the couple’s entitlement to burial in the churchyard and their advanced ages.
Re An Exhumation [2025] ECC Por 1
On the day before an interment of ashes, a relative of the deceased pointed out to the curate that the hole prepared for the ashes was not in the right plot. After consultation between the curate and the rector, a hole was dug in the correct plot. At a service for the interment of the ashes, the family left after the ashes (inside a bag) had been placed in the correct plot which had been dug and before the plot was filled in. The verger subsequently insisted that the ashes were in the wrong plot and, after consultation with the rector and the curate, the ashes were interred in the first plot. When the family was informed that the ashes had been moved, they said that the plot where the ashes had been place at the interment service was the correct plot. The rector, without consulting the archdeacon or the Diocesan Registry, dug up the ashes and interred them in the correct plot. He then applied for a confirmatory faculty. The Chancellor accepted that there had been a mistake, but pointed out that an exhumation should not take place without proper authority, and he ordered the rector to pay the costs of the preparation of the judgment.
Re Kingston Cemetery Fratton [2025] ECC Por 2
A boy had died, aged 8, in 2023. Under pressure from the boy’s grandmother his body was buried near relatives in Kingston Cemetery. The boy’s mother, would have preferred cremation, suffered deep grief, for which she received medical treatment. Neither the parents nor their son were of the Christian faith, and some time later the parents learned that the boy’s body had been buried in a consecrated part of the cemetery. The mother, with the consent of the father, petitioned for exhumation, so that her son’s body could be cremated and the ashes interred elsewhere. Before the date for exhumation, the father, who had separated from his wife, withdrew his consent, stating that he had recently become a Christian and “the situation does not feel right to me.” The Chancellor set aside the faculty for exhumation and referred the case to the Deputy Chancellor, who considered that there were exceptional grounds to grant a faculty for exhumation and cremation. It had been a mistake in 2023 for the boy’s body to be buried in consecrated ground when the parents had previously declared themselves to be atheists.
Re All Saints Ryde [2025] ECC Por 3
The church, designed by Gilbert Scott in the nineteenth century, is listed Grade II* and is the only church left open in Ryde. The congregation had become greatly diminished and the proposal was to carry out extensive reordering with the aim of revitalising ministry in Ryde by growing a Holy Trinity Brompton-style congregation, modelled on the Harbour Church in Portsmouth. To this end, the proposals included removing the remaining pews (there had been removals of pews in 1968, 1973 and 2008), in order to provide flexible space for both traditional and modern worship. The Victorian Society became a party opponent, objecting to the removal of all the pews and also the removal of the Victorian tiles in the aisle and between the north and south porches. A compromise was agreed between the Victorian Society and the petitioners (leaving some pews and retaining the tiles), which led to the Victorian Society withdrawing its objections. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had made a good case for the proposals and he granted a faculty.
Re A Burial [2025] ECC Bri 1
A lady (“XY”) in her 90s had lived with her sister and brother-in-law since 1988. The sister and brother-in-law had both died and were buried in the same grave. It had always been understood by XY and her family that XY would be buried in a grave next to her sister and brother-in-law. XY believed that the adjoining grave had been reserved for her, though no record has ever been found of a formal reservation. Unfortunately, someone else was buried in the grave intended for XY. When a close friend of XY discovered this, she applied, without the knowledge of XY, for a faculty for the remains of the person who had been interred in the grave informally reserved for XY to be exhumed (with the consent of that person’s family) and reinterred in another grave next to relatives, so that in due time XY’s body could be buried in the intended grave. The Chancellor accepted that a mistake had been made and he granted a faculty.
Re Gravesend and Milton Cemetery [2025] ECC Roc 1
The petitioner wished to have the cremated remains of her husband exhumed from the consecrated part of the Gravesend and Milton Cemetery and reinterred in a plot in a cemetery in France where she and her husband’s family lived. Her husband was born to French parents in England and he had served in the SOE during the Second World War and had received high French military honours. He and his wife had subsequently moved to France to work and live near his family, and he had died in 1979, when his remains were interred in a reserved plot his wife’s home town of Gravesend. There was a double compartment in the casket containing the deceased’s ashes, where it was intended that the petitioner’s ashes would be added in due course. The Chancellor, following the guidelines in Re Blagdon Cemetery [2002] Fam 299, could not find any exceptional circumstances to override the normal presumption of permanence of Christian burial and he therefore refused to grant a faculty.
Re St. Mary Headington [2025] ECC Oxf 5
Approval was sought for: (1) the creation of an extension to the north side of the church, accommodating a vestry and two WCs; and (2) extensive works of repair, renovation and refurbishment to the main church building, together with associated external works. The church was built between 1956 and 1958 and was unlisted. Following the condemnation and demolition of the former church hall in 2017, the church had no accessible toilets or facilities for catering for small group activities, such as work with children. Notwithstanding the reservations of the Twentieth Century Society concerning the design of the extension, the Chancellor granted a faculty.
Re St., Mary Magdalene Woodstock [2025] ECC Oxf 4
The Parochial Church Council wished to install solar panels on the roofs of the south nave and the south aisle of the Grade II* listed church. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that views of the proposed panels would be extremely restricted due to the shallow slopes of the roofs behind a parapet and also tree cover. The Chancellor stated that the Church of England’s target of ‘net zero’ carbon emissions by 2030 and the Anglican Communion’s Five Marks of Mission, which included ‘to strive to safeguard the integrity of creation, and sustain and renew the life of the earth’ were factors to be taken into consideration in determining the petition. He commended the parish for "their vision and commitment to the goal of ‘net zero’".
Re St. Bartholomew Kirkwhelpington [2025] ECC New 1
The proposals were the replacement of the sandstone paving of the chancel floor with York stone slabs; repairs to the organ; fitting of castors to the organ and relocation to the front of the nave; removal of two pews from the front of the nave; and laying up the Women’s Royal British Legion Flag. Although the proposed use of York stone had been contentious, that was resolved by a revised plan to source stone from a local quarry. However, the DAC did not support and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings objected to the complete replacement of the flooring. The Chancellor decided that the existing floor did not need complete replacement and directed that a faculty would be granted for the repair and, where necessary, replacement of damaged slabs with local stone of a similar type to that existing.
Re Kidlington Parish Burial Ground [2025] ECC Oxf 3
The petitioner’s son had died aged 16 in 2011 after being struck by a car driven by a drunken driver. His school had put pressure on the petitioner to have a funeral carried out before the GCSE period started, and the Coroner had told the petitioner that the only option at the time was burial, though the petitioner had preferred cremation. The petitioner was not informed that her son was to be buried in a consecrated part of the burial ground, nor of the legal implications of interment in consecrated ground. She now wished to have her son’s body exhumed and cremated, so that she could retain his cremated remains until her own death, when she wished his remains and her own to be buried together. The Chancellor considered that “there was a fundamental mistake of fact on the part of the petitioner as to the nature of the grave plot in which she had agreed to have her son’s body interred, and its legal consequences”. This and a number of additional special factors set out in the judgment led the Chancellor to decide that it was appropriate to grant a faculty.
Re Lambeth Cemetery [2025] ECC Swk 2
In distressing circumstances, the remains of a child (A) aged 8 had been buried in the consecrated part of a local authority cemetery. The family were unaware of the fact of consecration or its consequences. Informed by the local authority that their exclusive right of burial would soon end, the family applied for a faculty to exhume the remains, for them to be cremated and to be kept at home until they were scattered after the death of those who had known A. The Chancellor held that there were exceptional circumstances justifying exhumation as proposed. He also permitted the exhumation of the ashes of the boy’s uncle; these had been buried in the same grave as A because of the family relationship. The Chancellor disagreed with the view of the Legal Advisory Commission that the scattering of ashes was necessarily contrary to Canon Law, taking the view that this depended on whether it was reverent or not. He also explained that the fact that an exclusive right of burial had come to an end did not end the protection of the grave by the Consistory Court, although it might be the case that any memorial could be removed.
Re St. Mary Stoke by Nayland [2025] ECC SEI 3
The incumbent and Churchwarden sought permission to carry out masonry repairs to the nave south clerestory. The Chancellor said that he would not normally have prepared a judgment for a matter like this, but he had been concerned about comments from the visiting architect. However, he granted a faculty without requiring a consistory court, because there was some urgency, as the Church was on Historic England’s Heritage at Risk Register.
Re St. Mary & St. Michael Trumpington [2025] ECC Ely 1
The petitioners wished to carry out an extensive programme of reordering spread over ten years. The proposed works included (inter alia): a new lavatory in the current vestry; a new vestry at the west end of the south aisle; the removal of the pews from the north and south aisles to allow for better circulation; a new kitchenette and hospitality area in the north chapel; the main entrance to the church to be through the north porch as it once was, with work being carried out within the porch to allow for disabled access. The amenity societies consulted had reservations about a number of aspects of the works, but the Chancellor was satisfied that there was a clear and convincing justification for carrying out the proposals and he accordingly granted a faculty.
Re St. Mary Catcliffe [2025] ECC She 2
The petitioners’ baby boy had died less than an hour after being born and his remains had been buried in the churchyard. The Petitioners wished to introduce a memorial of black granite (which complied with the diocesan churchyard rules) and kerbs, with a number of sentiments inscribed on the memorial. The Chancellor approved the words and she also approved the kerbs, as kerbs were quite prevalent in the churchyard. The Chancellor also permitted two etched images, one of a baby giraffe toy and the other of a knitted heart presented to the petitioners by the hospital. The petitioners wished the etchings and wording on the memorial to be coloured blue. Without wishing to set a precedent, the Chancellor decided, exceptionally, to allow the colour blue, given that in this case the memorial was for a baby boy.
Re St. John the Baptist Belleau [2025] ECC Lin 1
The petitioner’s son had died as a result of a house fire in 1992. Not wishing for cremation for her son at the time, the petitioner arranged for his body to be buried in the churchyard at Belleau. The petitioner’s father had tended to grave until he was no longer able to do so, since when the grave had become difficult to visit, due to problems in the churchyard, including sunken graves, molehills and red ants. The petitioner now wished to have her son’s body exhumed, cremated and ashes interred in the grave of his grandmother, where the petitioner hoped in due time to have her own ashes interred. The Chancellor decided that the creation of the family grave was a sufficient exceptional reason to allow exhumation and reinterment.
Re St. Paul Caton-with-Littledale [2025] ECC Bla 2
The Petitioners, aged 79 and 81, both resident within the parish and on the church electoral roll, applied for the reservation of a double burial plot for the usual period (in the Diocese of Blackburn) of 25 years. Sufficient space remained within the churchyard for some five years’ future burials, but additional land was available for consecration. In 2023, the Parochial Church Council ("PCC") had decided that it would not support new faculties for grave reservations. However, at a meeting in April 2025, the PCC decided to support the present petition. Bearing in mind the PCC's decision, the availability of additional land and the age of the petitioners, the Chancellor determined to grant a faculty for the full period of 25 years.
Re Tuxford War Memorial [2025] ECC S&N 1
A private individual applied for a faculty to authorise the cleaning of the war memorial in Tuxford churchyard and the re-colouring of the inscriptions. The Chancellor highlighted various difficulties presented by the matter: the status of the petitioner; the fact that originally the question as to ownership of the memorial had not been investigated; what should be the recommended method of cleaning; what should be the appropriate colouring of the lettering; and whether (as the memorial was listed Grade II) Listed Building Consent would be required. The Chancellor accepted that the petition had a sufficient interest to present the petition and that investigations after the lodging of the petition to establish ownership were unsuccessful. He granted a faculty authorising the cleaning of the memorial with plain water or steam cleaning and the re-colouring of the lettering only on a like-for-like basis. He also required that no work should be done until the local authority had confirmed in writing that Listed Building consent would not be required.
Re St. Michael & All Angels Woolmer Green [2025] ECC StA 1
The petitioner wished to erect in the churchyard a memorial to her parents, who were part of the Travelling Community. The proposed memorial was to be polished blue pearl granite, with a cover slab with rounded steps and built-in vases. The design included gilded lettering, a carved angel draped over the upright stone, three-dimensional carved climbing roses and inlaid photographs. The original design put forward was, however, amended: the three-dimensional climbing roses were replaced with discreet climbing roses lower down on the headstone; the stone specification was changed to honed light grey granite; the shape of the upright stone was amended; the urns and photographs were omitted; and the angel design was simplified. The Chancellor decided that the amended specification should be approved: “I consider that an appropriate balance has been struck in this case between allowing expression of cultural traditions and beliefs of the Travelling Community and taking into consideration the needs of the settled community.”
Re Chew Magna Churchyard [2025] ECC B&W 2
A breach of the churchyards regulations had been referred to the Chancellor. A memorial had been installed in the churchyard, without waiting for the Rector’s decision, and the design included a red poppy with green leaves. The regulations did not permit coloured motifs. Although the lady who ordered the memorial for her husband’s grave from a local stonemason was not aware of the regulations, the Chancellor pointed out that the stonemason should have been aware of the regulations and should have informed his client that approval was needed from the Chancellor for a coloured motif. The lady had requested a red poppy, as her husband had been involved for 15 years in collecting funds for the British Legion. On compassionate grounds, the Chancellor decided that the colouring of the red poppy could remain, but that the green colouring should be removed and either that part of the design left uncoloured or painted in a manner permitted by the Regulations.
Re St. Mary East Molesey [2025] ECC Gui 1
The petitioners wished to relocate 64 headstones from the centre of the churchyard to it s perimeter, in order to create “a safe and welcoming outdoor space for events, activities and quiet reflection”. The Chancellor granted a faculty.
Re St. Paul Bentley Common [2025] ECC Chd 1
The petitioner’s son committed suicide in 2013. The family had lived since 1971 at Blackmore in Essex. The petitioner’s son’s ashes were not buried in Blackmore, because it was alleged that the then incumbent would not conduct a funeral there. The Petitioner and her husband therefore arranged for their son’s ashes to be buried at Bentley Common, where other members of the family had been buried. After the death of her husband, whose ashes were buried at Blackmore, the petitioner wished to have her son’s ashes exhumed and buried in his father’s grave, where the petitioner also wished to have her own remains buried in due course. The Chancellor decided that there were special circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty: the petitioner’s son had never lived at Bentley Common, nor indicated that he wished to be buried there; Blackmore was his home; reinterment at Blackmore would create a family grave; and at the time of the son’s death the situation at Blackmore had been far from ideal.
Re St. Mary Haversham [2025] ECC Oxf 2
The petitioner wished to reserve for himself and his wife a grave in the churchyard next to the grave of his mother, who had died a few months previously. There was room for only five years’ worth of new graves, at the current rate of one a year, though the Parochial Church Council (the PCC) had resolved to re-use burial plots that had not had any burials in them for at least 150 years, so as to create at least another 50 grave spaces. The petitioner lived in the village and had strong connections with the church, and the PCC strongly supported the petition. The Chancellor determined that, in view of the PCC’s plans to reuse part of the churchyard for burials to meet the future needs of the parish, it was appropriate for him to grant a faculty.
Re St. John the Apostle Whetstone [2025] ECC Lon 1
The proposal was to remove twenty-eight pews and four choir frontals and to replace them with moveable, stackable ‘Theo’ chairs with upholstered seats. A representative sample of four pews would remain. There was one letter of objection from a private objector. The Victorian Society did not approve of upholstered seats. The Chancellor considered that the harm to the church caused by the removal of the pews would be low to moderate and that “given the clearly established need for much more space with the changing demographic profile of the congregation and the increased attendance and vitality of this church, the proposed changes are justified.” However, he granted a faculty subject to a condition that the new chairs should be unupholstered, unless otherwise ordered by the court. He gave the petitioners three weeks in which to put forward further detailed representations regarding upholstered seats to be considered by the Victorian Society and the Chancellor.
Re St. Mary Rougham [2025] ECC SEI 1
The petitioners wished to exhume the ashes of their mother, Mrs. Rose, from Roughan churchyard and reinter the ashes in Beyton churchyard. At the time of her death, Mrs. Rose’s children had decided to inter their mother’s ashes in her parents’ grave at Rougham. Mrs. Rose’s siblings had been ‘furious’ that the funeral had taken place and that their sister’s ashes had been interred in their parents’ grave without them being informed, and they refused to accept an apology from the petitioners. Owing to the family tension, the petitioners felt that the only solution was to exhume Mrs. Rose’s ashes and inter them in a different churchyard with the ashes of her husband, who had recently died. Mrs. Rose’s siblings at first objected to the exhumation, but later withdrew their objection. The Chancellor considered that there were exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty to allow a family grave to be created for the remains of Mrs. Rose and her husband.
Re St. Mary Uggeshall [2025] ECC SEI 2
The person whose cremated remains were the subject of the petition had lived in London and had died suddenly at the age of 56. His family had been persuaded by a close friend of the deceased, who lived next to the churchyard in Uggeshall in Suffolk, to have the deceased ashes interred in the churchyard there. The family subsequently fell out with the friend after, as they alleged, he caused a motor accident, as a result of which one family member was admitted to hospital and another was treated for shock. The friend never acknowledged responsibility for the accident. The family then felt it difficult to visit the grave overlooked by the former friend’s house. They therefore wished to have the cremated remains exhumed and reburied in London, giving as their reasons the rift, the desire to create a family grave and the difficulty in visiting Uggeshall for the surviving family. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty, as he considered that none of these reasons were sufficiently exceptional to justify exhumation.
Re Exhumation of a Baby [2024] ECC Exe 1
A baby girl had died at birth, though a twin had survived. The baby had been buried in the churchyard of a village in Devon. Six months after the burial, the mother had managed to free herself from her relationship with the father of the baby, from whom she had suffered domestic abuse for two years and she sought help from local domestic abuse professionals and the police. The father had been given a prison sentence for offences relating to abuse. The mother returned to live with her parents in another village. She suffered post-traumatic stress symptoms and could not contemplate visiting the village where the baby was buried. She therefore wished to have the baby’s remains exhumed and reinterred in the village where she and her parents lived. The father objected, as he was under a restraining order not to visit that village. The Chancellor was satisfied that the need to protect the mother and her surviving daughter was sufficient to establish an exception to the general principle against exhumation, and he therefore granted a faculty.
Re All Saints Rainford [2025] ECC Liv 1
An application had been made for a faculty to authorise retrospectively the display of illuminated symbols on the church tower at certain times of the year, for example, an illuminated cross during the Advent and Christmas seasons. A complaint was made by a local resident, living approximately 400-500m away, claiming, inter alia, light pollution and safety concerns. The Chancellor determined that a faculty should be granted, subject to conditions as to limits on the timing of the illumination and to the petitioner first obtaining planning consent.
Re St. Mary the Virgin Sprotbrough [2025] ECC She 1
A large scheme of reordering was proposed, with the aim of improving the experience of worship and also creating flexible spaces at the front and rear of the nave to facilitate increasing community events. There were objections to (inter alia) the relocation of the chancel screen to beneath the east window and the removal of some pews (which were said by the Twentieth Century Society to be part of the works carried out by Sir Ninian Comper in 1915); the division of the twentieth century lectern/priest’s desk designed by the architect George Pace; and the relocation of the pulpit. The Chancellor decided that the proposed changes were well argued, and she therefore granted a faculty.
Re All Saints Featherstone [2025] ECC Lee 1
Wakefield Metropolitan District Council sought a confirmatory faculty for the felling of a tree that had been removed from the churchyard without authority. A routine safety inspection by the Council had revealed that an ash tree was affected by a fungus and was suffering from ash die-back, which would cause the inner structure of the tree to deteriorate. The tree was duly felled without permission, which the Council could have sought from the Archdeacon under List B of the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules 2015 (as amended). After explaining the various methods whereby permission can be obtained for the felling of a tree, including in the case of an emergency, the Chancellor pointed out that the Council’s initial allegation that “We have always had an agreement that if the works are for safety reasons, then no applications are required” could not override the requirement for permission in accordance with the faculty rules. However, he concluded that it was appropriate in the present instance to grant a confirmatory faculty.
Re St. Bartholomew Colne [2025] ECC Bla 1
The Rector and Churchwarden sought a faculty to regularise the installation of four infra-red heaters in the north aisle of the church, the subject of an interim faculty, and also to make permanent some minor reordering carried out under an archdeacon’s licence, namely, the removal of four pews, a pew frontal, and two altar rails from the north chapel and the installation of free-standing shelving and refrigerators as storage for the church’s food bank. The Victorian Society and Historic Buildings and Places objected to the proposals to remove the four pews, pew frontal and the altar rails from the north chapel. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the petitioners had made a clear and convincing justification for the proposals in terms of the resulting community and missional benefits. The faculty was subject to a condition that the four pews, their pew frontal, and the two altar rails should all be retained within the church building or in the adjacent Parish Rooms.
Re St. Paul Heslington [2025] ECC Yor 1
Following a major extension and radical reordering of the church in 1973, a “bold stainless steel font … surmounted by a dove” was introduced into the church. The nineteenth century font was placed outside the church and used as a plant holder. In recent years its condition had seriously deteriorated and in 2022 it had been brought back into the church and its parts had been stored on wooden pallets behind a pew. Having considered various options for the font, the petitioners had decided that burial of the font in the churchyard was the best option. The Church Building Council, Historic England and the Victorian Society did not support the proposal. The Chancellor considered that the redesigned interior of the church had made the retention of the older font no longer practical or desirable, and after considering all other options she concluded that there was no viable alternative other than to allow the burial of the font in the churchyard.
Re St. Mary the Virgin Bruton [2025] ECC B&W 1
The Rector and Churchwardens petitioned for a faculty to authorise the installation of a kitchen and servery unit in the north aisle of the church and two toilets on the ground floor of the tower, with a new meeting room and gallery above. The works would involve moving the tower screen forward a short distance. One parishioner objected, being concerned that the relocation of the screen and the construction of the balcony would have an adverse impact on the west window. She also was concerned about the loss of the 19th century doors from the screen. The Victorian Society had expressed similar reservations. The Chancellor granted a faculty: although the works would involve some harm to the fabric, and the lowest part of the west window would be obscured, such harm, though regrettable, was outweighed by the practical need for modern facilities within the building.
Re St. Lawrence Lechlade [2024] ECC Glo 1
An extensive programme of reordering was proposed, including raising the nave floor and introducing new limestone flagstones; underfloor heating; air source heat pumps in the churchyard; replacing the nave pews with chairs, introduction of a west end gallery with two toilets underneath; and other items too numerous to be listed in a short summary. The main object of the proposals was ‘putting the church to viable uses that are consistent with its role as a place of worship and mission.’ Approximately 40 letters of objection were received, but no objector became a party opponent. The Chancellor granted a faculty for the majority of the works.
Re Holy Trinity Langdale [2025] ECC Car 1
The petitioner wished to install in the churchyard a headstone commemorating two members of his family whose ashes were scattered at a local estate. The intention was for the stone to be placed with memorials to other members of the family. The Diocesan Advisory Committee did not recommend the proposal for the following reasons: it was not possible to determine whether the deceased relatives would have wished to have a memorial in the churchyard; available space in this popular area should be retained for graves rather than family memorials; the requested memorial would mark neither a grave nor an interment of cremated remains; and, whilst the proposed memorial was intended to match other family memorials, a new stone and its lettering ‘could be very conspicuous next to its weathered neighbours.’ For these reasons, the Chancellor refused to grant a faculty. He also declined an amended proposal to attach a white marble plaque to an existing family memorial.
Re The Wisdom of God Lower Kingswood [2025] ECC Swk 1
This judgment concerned a preliminary issue as to whether a faculty would be required for the sale of a Greek lectionary, which had been given to the church in 1948. The church is unlisted and unconsecrated, but in 1990 the Bishop of Southwark made an order under the provisions of section 6 of the Faculty Jurisdiction Measure 1964, making the church subject to the faculty jurisdiction. The lectionary had never been kept in the church. It was originally put into a bank vault, but allegedly displayed in the church occasionally on festival occasions. In 1968 it was loaned to the British Library. In 2019 the British Library informed the parish that it no longer wished to have the lectionary on loan, and it was transferred to Trinity College, Cambridge. Notwithstanding that the lectionary had rarely, if ever, been in the church, the Chancellor decided that it could still be described as part of the contents of the church, even if its whereabouts were not physically inside the church. Therefore, a faculty would be required to authorise a disposal of the lectionary.