Judgment Search

Downloads

Click on one of the following to view and/or download the relevant document:

Alphabetical Index of all judgments on this web site as at 10 September 2024

Judgments indexed by Diocese:
2023 Judgments
2022 Judgments
2021 Judgments

Graves

Display:

The petitioners wished to reserve a grave in the churchyard of Hulme Walfield. They did not live in the parish. In Schedule 2 of the petition it was indicated that the incumbent and Churchwardens did not consent to the reservation. The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty on the basis that a burial of a non-parishioner could only take place with the consent of the incumbent, who should have regard to any general guidance given by the PCC (s 6(2) of the Church of England (Miscellaneous Provisions) Measure 1976). So to grant a faculty would be to subvert the purpose of Section 6(2) of the 1976 measure, since the reservation of a grave by faculty would override the minister’s power to give or withhold consent to the eventual burial of non-parishioners.

A Faculty was refused for the reservation of a grave space, as there were few empty graves left in the churchyard.

During the parish priest's absence, whilst attending a course, a burial took place in the closed churchyard. Prior to his absence, the priest had told the funeral director and the family that a burial could not take place, unless in accordance with one of the exceptions in the Order in Council closing the churchyard for burials, namely: (1) where a grave had been reserved by faculty; (2) where a person could be buried in the same grave as a relative. (Also, cremated remains can be buried in a closed churchyard.) The funeral director arranged for the deceased to be buried next to the deceased's brother in a tight space between two graves. The Chancellor determined that the interment was unlawful, and could not be made lawful retrospectively by the Ministry of Justice or the court, but he decided that no action should be taken to disturb the burial or to refer the matter for police investigation.

The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty for the reservation of a double grave, as there were very few empty grave spaces left in the churchyard.

The petitioners wished to reserve a single-width, double-depth grave space in the churchyard. The vicar and the Parochial Church Council did not support this application or the reservation of further graves generally. The present churchyard would be full within 5 to 7 years, possibly 10. However, there was a further piece of land, currently used as a recreational area, which could in future be consecrated and enable burials to continue for about 50 years. On the facts of this particular case, the Chancellor determined that it was appropriate to grant a faculty, but to limit it to a period of seven years, with permission to apply (by letter) within the last year to extend beyond that time. 

The petitioner, who had lived in the parish all his life, wished to reserve a grave space in the churchyard for 25 years. According to the vicar, there was space in the churchyard for burials for a period of 5 to 10 years. There was also an extra piece of land, currently used as a recreation area, which could be brought into use and accommodate burials for a further 50 years. In 2023, the Parochial Church Council decided not to support any further reservations of grave spaces. The Chancellor decided, in view of the petitioner's life expectancy being 7-10 years, owing to paralysis following an accident, and for pastoral reasons, to grant a faculty reserving a grave for a period of 7 years, so that no-one else with a right of burial would be prejudiced by the grant before the space for further burials was full. The petitioner was given liberty to apply for an extension during the seventh year.

The petitioner applied for a faculty to reserve a grave in the churchyard for his father, who had lived in the parish for many years. The parish policy was that applications from residents would automatically be supported. In July 2024, there were approximately 100 graves spaces available for an average of 5.8 burials per year. The Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty, but limited it to a period of 15 years, with permission for the petitioner to apply for an extension of the period within 6 months of its expiry.

The petitioners, a couple aged 77 and 76 and resident in the parish, wished to reserve a grave space in the churchyard for 50 years. The parish policy was that applications from residents would automatically be supported. In July 2024, there were approximately 100 graves spaces available for an average of 5.8 burials per year. The Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty.

The petitioners wished to reserve a grave in the churchyard next to the grave of their son. Two parishioners objected: one, on the grounds that the churchyards regulations did not allow a grave reservation; and the other, on the grounds that the reservation would create a gap in a row of graves. The Chancellor granted a faculty. The first objector had misunderstood the purpose of the churchyard regulations, which did not prohibit a grave reservation, and, as regards the second objection, there would be only a modest effect on the appearance of the churchyard. The petitioners (who were in their 60s) were parishioners and entitled to be buried in the churchyard; there was sufficient room for burials for approximately thirty years; and there was a good reason for the petitioners wishing to be buried next to their son.

The petitioner wished to reserve a grave space in the churchyard for himself and his wife. They lived in the parish and had relatives buried in the churchyard, including their daughter, who had died in a road traffic accident at the age of 26. The Parochial Church Council did not support the application, as it had exercised a policy for some time of not supporting grave reservations. It was estimated that the churchyard would be full in 18 years' time. The Chancellor decided that there were exceptional circumstances justifying the grant of a faculty.