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 reason given for the request was that access to the current grave was inconvenient and unsafe, being impeded by scaffolding poles which had been in position since 2019, due to problems with the church roof, which could only be resolved as and when the church could raise the money to pay for the work. 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.

The proposal was to construct a ramp at the front of a 1960s church, facing an access from the road, in order to allow step-free access to the front of the church for the disabled. Objections were based on the design of the ramp, the possibility of its use by skateboarders and consequent safety issues, the fact that there was step-free access to the church from the car park at the rear, and difficulties of loading and unloading at the front of the church. Faculty granted.

The petition proposed the replacement of the link between the church and the Millennium Room (a church extension on the north side), providing a lobby, meeting rooms, storage and improved toilet and kitchen facilities. There were eight objections on behalf of eleven people, on the grounds of costs, but none became a party opponent. The Chancellor granted a faculty.

As part of the church's aim to reduce its carbon footprint to net zero by 2030, the present proposal was to install solar panels on the roof of the south-aisle of the church, six storage batteries in the former organ blower room, two external heat pump evaporator units and associated cabling. The Chancellor considered that the panels would have little visual impact on the church and that the level of damage to the architectural and historical significance of the church would be very low. He therefore granted a faculty.

The proposals were the introduction of a nave altar; the removal of the rood screen; and removal/adaptation of the choir stalls. The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty for the proposed works without consideration being given to whether the chancel arch would need to be removed and also what replacement seating would be appropriate for the choir. He therefore adjourned the petition in order for these matters to be addressed.

The main items of a programme of reordering were the extension of the meeting area at the west end of the church, which would involve removing two rows of pews, and the extension of the gallery over it. Ten parishioners gave notice of objection, but none became parties opponent. 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.

Following a reordering of the church in 1991-1994, it was proposed to place carvings of the heads of the current Bishop of Peterborough (the Rt. Rev. William Westwood) and the current Vicar of Oundle (the Rev. Dr. Lloyd Caddick) as label stops in the nave. (Label stops are put where arches meet in a 'V' at the top of pillars.) The new carvings would be put at the top of the only two pillars in the nave which did not have label stops above them. There were four parties opponent, whose main objections were on the ground of appropriateness, including a suggestion that it was not appropriate to place the likenesses of living persons in the church. The Chancellor found against the objectors and granted a faculty. He was able to accept that the proposals for carved heads were acceptable legally, architecturally and aesthetically, and they were appropriate items to be introduced into the church.

The petitioners sought a faculty for the construction of a parish room (by way of extension) to the south of the church. Two neighbours and another parishioner objected, though there were no objections from the local planning authority (who in fact granted planning consent) or the amenity societies. The Chancellor granted a faculty.

An extensive reordering was proposed for a Grade II listed Victorian church. The Victorian Society and Heritage England, though not parties opponent, objected to the replacement of most of the pews with chairs, replacement of the dado panelling and replacement of the stone and wood floor with new wooden flooring. The Chancellor determined that the resulting public benefit (including liturgical freedom, pastoral well-being, opportunities for mission, and putting the church to viable uses that were consistent with its role as a place of worship and mission) would outweigh any harm that would be caused by the changes.

The petitioners sought permission to (1) excavate, inspect and repair the current trench arch system; and (2) if found to be beyond repair, install an extended trench arch drainage system within the churchyard, connected to existing facilities, with the addition of a macerator. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to (inter alia) a condition requiring a continuing archaeological watching brief.