The petitioners wished to install a plaque, 25cm by 45cm, at the entrance to the church in order to comply with their commitment to acknowledge a grant from the Heritage Lottery Fund. The Chancellor felt that the fixing of such a relatively large plaque to one side of the main door of the church would cause serious harm to the building within the meaning of questions 1-3 in Re St. Alkmund Duffield (2013) Fam 146. He determined to dismiss the petition, unless within one month the petitioners applied for an adjournment in order to amend the petition and seek permission for the adoption of either of the smaller alternative plaques suggested by the Chancellor in his judgment.

The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty to allow a coloured engraving of Thomas the Tank Engine on a memorial to a three year old child.

In 1953 a faculty had been granted to the petitioner's grandfather to permit the erection of a memorial and the creation of a vault reserving to the petitioner's grandfather and the members of his family the right of burial in the vault. The present petitioner's grandparents and other deceased members of the family had since been buried in the vault. There were six shelves in the vault, of which four had been used. The petitioner wished to reserve the remaining two shelves for the burial of himself and his fiancee. The petitioner's cousin objected to a faculty being granted on the grounds that the reservations would prevent any further members of the family (who might predecease the petitioner and his fiancee) from being placed in the vault, and because she felt that the terms of the orginal faculty limited the right of interment to direct descendants only. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty, but directed that (a) a person who married into the family would be eligible to be buried in the vault; (b) an interment should be treated as including the placing of cremated remains in the vault; and (c) if "space remains on any given shelf for the seemly custody of the cremated remains of more than one person then it is permissible for there to be such remains of more than one person on each shelf in the vault."

The proposal was for two new glass porches, at the north and south entrances of the Grade I church. There was an issue about the north porch. Historic England felt that the new woodwork should reflect the woodwork in the rest of the church, whereas the petitioners favoured a design to match the woodwork of the adjacent shop and servery in the north-west corner of the church. The Chancellor considered that the wordwork of the new north porch should relate to the modern design of the adjacent servery, and he granted a faculty accordingly.

The Dean of Arches granted to the Victoria Society leave to appeal on restricted grounds in respect of a judgment by the Chancellor of the Diocese of Peterborough relating to reordering proposals for the church of St. Botolph Longthorpe.

The Chancellor granted a faculty to authorise a major scheme of reordering, which included the removal of pews and their replacement with hardwood chairs and benches; moving the font and the organ; replacing the altar against the east wall and installing a free-standing altar at the west end of the chancel; and removing the rood screen. Notwithstanding the objections of ChurchCare, Historic England, and the Victorian and Twentieth Century Societies, the Chancellor was "satisfied that the reordering is part of an overall holistic scheme for a thriving church community, which will be a major public benefit outweighing any harm."

A re-ordering project included the removal of all of the nave pews and their replacement with chairs; the installation of a new kitchenette and chair store at the west end of the building; the relocation of the font; and replacement of the dangerous wooden pew platforms with a simple engineered timber floor. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty: "... the circumstances and needs of the parish relied upon at present do not justify the changes sought because those needs can be met with a less harmful scheme."

The Vicar and Churchwardens applied for permission for  the creation of a disabled access toilet, a relocated and expanded kitchenette area and the removal of some pews at the front and back of the main nave pew block to enable greater freedom of movement and flexibility of use, which would also help wheelchair users, who would not then have to use the central aisle. There were three objectors who did not become parties opponent. Their principal objections related to the proximity of the toilet to the new kitchenette and insufficient privacy for those using the toilet. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had made a good case for the proposals and granted a faculty.

The proposal was to remove 26 pews and 3 pew fronts; relocate the mounts for the churchwardens' staves; and move an existing monitor to a new position in the gallery. An archdeacon's temporary reordering licence had already been granted, whereby the pews have been stored and 70 stackable chairs already owned by the church had been used in the nave. The Chancellor was satisfied that the pews should be replaced with chairs. She also agreed to the relocation of mounts for the churchwardens' staves to the pillars either side of the entrance to the church and the installation of the monitor on a retractable bracket on the north side wall of the gallery.

The petitioners wished to carry out works in the churchyard, comprising the creation of an area for cremated remains; creation of a garden for social and recreational use; and the reconfiguration and resurfacing of the parking area. There was an objection in respect of the parking area. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to conditions regarding memorials, human remains and the recording of the works.