The Vicar and Churchwardens applied for a faculty for the removal and sale of the Vicar’s Stall, which had not been used since it was moved to its present position next to the north wall in 1991, following reconstruction work after a major fire. The church is unlisted and there were no objections, but the Victorian Society wrote to say that they did not support the proposal. The Chancellor was satisfied that it was not practical to use the stall where it was, and there was no other appropriate place to put it. The Chancellor therefore granted a faculty.

The petition proposed the construction of a new boarding house for St. Paul's Cathedral School on the footprint of the former church (the body of which was destroyed by bombing in 1941), whilst retaining the Wren tower. Notwithstanding an objection from the Twentieth Century Society that the proposals would cause substantial harm and that this would not be outweighed by substantial public benefits, the Chancellor granted a faculty.

There was a proposal to install a toilet and kitchen facilities at the western end of the church, with associated water supply and drainage. Some further pew removal was also proposed. Historic England did not support the kitchen proposals. The proposed insertion of an extractor fan into a glass panel of the door into the tower concerned the Diocesan Advisory Committee and the Local Planning Authority. The Chancellor granted a faculty for the new toilet and associated water and drainage (to be treated as Phase 1), and considered that the parish should reconsider the remaining items (Phase 2).

The Vicar and Churchwardens wished to erect a prefabricated shed in the churchyard as a storage facility for the local scout group. The Chancellor did not regard it as appropriate that part of church land should be permanently given over to a secular storage building, but was willing to grant a faculty for a temporary licence to install and use the proposed building for a period of five years.

There was a proposal to remove two large yew trees growing close to the vestry. The Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty for the removal of one tree, as it appeared that it had caused damage to the vestry. He declined to grant a faculty for the other tree, the removal of which would have resulted in a loss of privacy for a neighbour, unless (1) further monitoring showed that the tree was causing damage to the vestry; (2) the trees advisor or architect recommended the removal; and (3) a scheme of planting was proposed to preserve privacy for the neighbour.

There was a proposal to fell two yew trees in the churchyard and to reduce the height of three other yew trees. A neighbour argued that the felling of one of the trees would affect the amenity of his house. The petitioners said they wished to have the two trees removed in anticipation of building an extension to the church. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty for the felling of the first two trees. The petitioners would have to make a case for the removal of the trees if and when they submitted a petition for an ewxtension to the church. However, he granted a faculty for the reduction in height of the other three trees. 

The Vicar and Churchwardens of the unlisted church sought a faculty to remove the chancel and sanctuary furniture (with the exception of the Holy Table); the removal of a row of pews at the east end of the nave; the creation of a new raised floor (to be carpeted); the installation of underfloor heating; the installation of additional lighting in the chancel; and the replacement of the electronic organ console with a new one in a different position. The Twentieth Century Society objected to the removal of the choir stalls and the Communion rail. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to the Communion rail being retained, but moved to a position further east.

The peitition proposed the rebuilding and reordering of the church following damage by an arson attack. The Victorian Society objected to the removal of some elements of fabric, an extension on the north side of the church, and the proposed new design for the roof. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to conditions.

The petitioner wished to exhume the cremated remains of her husband from the churchyard at Ranmore in Surrey and reinter them in the churchyard at Fulbourn in Cambridgeshire. The deceased's remains had been interred in 2011, and in 2022 the petitioner had moved to live in Cambridgeshire. The petitioner was concerned that in years to come she might become physically unable to visit her husband's grave in Surrey. The Deputy Chancellor refused to grant a faculty. Following the guidance in the Court of Arches decision in re Blagdon Cemetery [2002] 4 All ER 482, moving residence was not an exceptional reason to justify a departure from the normal rule that interment in consecrated ground should be regarded as permanent.

The proposals were: (1)    Repositioning of the font and removal of its plinth; and (2)    removal of eight pews from the north aisle to create a usable community space. The plinth was not original to the font and was regarded as a trip hazard. The church was the only community facility in the village. The Chancellor regarded the pine pews as having no intrinsic significance in themselves and he granted a faculty for all the works.