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

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. The stone was of poor quality and had been fixed to the inside stonework of the church with four ordinary screws. Since the memorial's installation the inscription had become difficult to read. A churchwarden, discovering that no faculty had been granted for the memorial, applied for a confirmatory faculty and for permission to have the inscription repainted in black. The Chancellor determined that it was appropriate to have a memorial inside the church to such a long-serving churchwarden, who had also served on the Parish Council. She granted 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 Thornhaugh [1975] Theodore Fitzwalter Butler Ch. (Peterborough)

The Parochial Church Council applied for a faculty to authorise the sale of a helmet which, since the early 17th century had hung over the tomb of the first Duke of Bedford. The Chancellor determined that he was unable to grant a faculty, for two reasons. Firstly, the PCC had no title to the helmet, as it belonged in law to the descendants of the first Duke of Bedford. Secondly, section 3 of the Faculty Jurisdiction Measure 1964 provides: "A Court may grant a Faculty to which this section applies (1) although the owner of the monument withholds his consent thereto or cannot be found after reasonable efforts to find him have been made... (3) no faculty to which this section applies shall be granted if the owner of the monument in question withholds his consent thereto, but satisfies the court that he is within a reasonable time willing and able to remove the monument … and to exercise such works as the Court may require to repair any damage to the fabric". In this case there was no evidence at the hearing as to who was or were the heir or heirs at law, and no evidence as to whether they gave or withheld their consent.

Re St. Andrew Thringstone [2013] Mark Blackett-Ord Ch. (Leicester)

Faculty granted for exhumation of cremated remains interred by mistake in a grave already reserved by Faculty. Order for costs against the incumbent, whose error in interring the remains in a reserved grave had given rise to the proceedings.

Re St. Andrew Thursford [2022] ECC Nor 1

The petitioners wished to remove 25 pews at the rear of the church to provide space and flexibility to equip the church for community events. They also sought to install a new stained-glass window in the Chad Chapel. Notwithstanding concerns from amenity societies about the design of the proposed new window, and concerns of the Victorian Society as to the number of pews to be removed, the Chancellor granted a faculty.

Re St. Andrew Tur Langton [2019] ECC Lei 5

A farmer and his son wished to install in the the churchyard a memorial to the farmer's late wife, comprising a small unpolished stone statue of a sheep on a plinth, inscribed in memory of the deceased and with the additional words “The Lord is my Shepherd”. The Chancellor granted a faculty.

Re St. Andrew West Wratting [2020] ECC Ely 1

The proposal was to protect the external walls of the chancel and the east wall of the nave, which are composed of rubble with field and flint stones and earth consolidated mortar, which is very soft, by applying lime rendering. The evidence was that the church stonework had been rendered until some time during the 19th century. Three alternative thicknesses of rendering were proposed. There was disagreement amongst the interested parties and advisers over which option should be chosen, and so the decision was left to the Chancellor. The  Chancellor granted a faculty to allow one of the thicker rendering options, subject to a condition that where the render met the stone of windows, doors, buttresses, etc., the render was to be feathered down to meet the stonework.

Re St. Andrew Witchford [2015] Anthony Leonard Ch. (Ely)

The petitioner applied for a faculty giving her the right to be buried in the same grave as her former partner, with whom she had lived for 25 years until his death in 1986. The family of the deceased's first partner, who died in 1957, objected to the petitioner having the right to be buried in the same grave as their father, there having been a division between the two families. The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty: "In my judgment the dispute between the parties weighs in favour of non-intervention."

Re St. Andrew Witchford [2016] ECC Ely 2

The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty to authorise a proposed memorial which was outside the Churchyards Regulations by reason of size (base width 60ins and stone 48ins high on top of a plinth 14ins high); type of stone and finish (blue polished granite); and inscription (overly long and sentimental message addressed by the family to the deceased). The Chancellor made it clear that the presence of other memorials in the churchyard which were outside the regulations and installed without faculty did not oblige him to authorise further similar memorials.

Re St. Ann Oldland [2017] ECC Bri 2

In 1959, a faculty had been granted to authorise the introduction into the church of a painting entitled 'Ecce, Homo', which was attributed to Murillo. The Chancellor was now asked to grant a confirmatory faculty for the loan of the painting to the Bristol Art Gallery in 2012, which had taken place without the authority of a faculty. The Church Buildings Council supported the loan in the interests of the care and security of the painting, subject to a good quality copy being placed in the church. The Chancellor granted a faculty subject to that condition.

Re St. Anne Aigburth [2015] Sir Mark Hedley Ch. (Liverpool)

The proposals included: "to install an electronically operated retractable projector screen, to be installed behind the chancel arch; to install a projector which will be discreetly mounted in front of the screen on one of the roof beams; to install four monitors to be positioned so as to be clearly seen – two from the altar ...". English Heritage and the Victorian Society objected. The Chancellor considered the principles laid down in Re St. Alkmund Duffield, and determined to grant a Faculty: "I am persuaded both by their very limited visibility [the screens] and the reversibility of the project and the liturgical needs of the church that those needs significantly outweigh the modest harm which may be caused."