The church was in need of major repairs to the building and the drains. The Chancellor was content to approve the proposals, but highlighted that there was a major defect in the procedure, in that the public nnotice did not inform the public of the nature of the works but simply described the works as: ‘To undertake repairs and refurbishments in accordance with the Schedule of Works ref 1403A prepared by Jane Holt Architect 16.02.18 and accompanying drawings numbered…….’ The Chancellor required fresh public notices listing the main items of work proposed, but granted a interim faculty authorising the works to proceed, but with a requirement for the works to cease if any objection was received in response to the public notices.

The Chancellor granted a faculty to allow the sale of a painting of the Ascension, by the 18th century Italian artist Vincenzo Damini. The painting was originally in the church of St. Peter-at-Arches, Lincoln. That church had been demolished and the painting was transferred to St. Giles Church before it opened in 1936. The Chancellor was satisfied that a case had been made for the disposal of the painting, for which the parish did not have suficient sources to secure adequately in the church: "In order for me to grant a faculty the Petitioners must persuade me on the balance of probabilities that some good and sufficient ground has been proved. A good ground is a “special reason”. I am satisfied that the special reason here is the fact that there is no longer a meaningful relationship between the church of St Giles and the painting. I am also satisfied that in the present financial circumstances of this church, that ground is a sufficient ground, notwithstanding that the painting may be lost to Lincoln."

Petition for setting aside of an area of the churchyard for the interment of cremated remains. Objection that site unsuitable. Faculty granted.

The petitioner, acting as executor for her brother, wished his remains to be buried in their mother's grave and for the existing memorial to their mother to be replaced with a memorial to mother and son. One of four other siblings objected to the wording on the proposed new memorial not including the words, 'We will meet again, Darling', which had been inscribed on the original memorial. The Chancellor decided that a change should not be made to a grave if it would give rise to family discord. He therefore refused to grant a faculty.

The proposal was to replace the existing pipe organ with an electronic organ.  A letter of objection was received from a former organist at the church, who argued that the small instrument was ideal for the size of the church and, with minimal maintenance, had been working well for approximately 130 years; there was no reason why the organ should not continue to be effective for another 100 years; the life of an electronic organ, he claimed, rarely exceeds 20 years. The petitioners stated that the proposal to replace the pipe organ with an electronic organ was part of a long-term proposal to reorder the church. The advice of the organs adviser was that the organ had no historical importance, was tonally undistinguished and there were problems with the pedal boards. The Chancellor was satisfied that a good case had been made for the replacement of the pipe organ and he granted a faculty.

A faculty petition relating to a proposed reordering was dismissed on the basis that the petitioners had failed to comply with the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules, in particular with regard to not giving proper notice of the proposals.

The proposals for the Grade I listed church included the removal of the fixed pews in the nave, north aisle and choir, and their replacement with new moveable pew benches; also, the installation of underfloor heating. The Commissary General granted a faculty, but expressed concern that a contract had been signed with the contractor before the petition had been referred to her.

It was proposed to create space in the nave, to allow for a wide range of worship, social and cultural activities in the Grade I church. The works included removing 17 pews (some from the nave and some from the Lady Chapel); levelling the floor; moving the font from near the south door to the Lady Chapel; improving the layout of the chancel by the removal of some of the pews; removal of the 1944 communion rail; conversion of the Lady Chapel altar to allow the storage of altar linen; and the creation of new cupboard storage space. The Chancellor was not satisfied that a good case had been made for the moving of the font from near the south door, nor for removing the pews from the Lady Chapel, but he granted a faculty for the other items.

The petitioners sought a faculty to replace an existing monochrome Victorian stained glass window on the south side of the nave, the new window to be of a brightly coloured abstract design. This was a Millenium project for the village. The Chancellor was satisfied that the proposal did not adversely affect the special architectural or historic interest of the church and that it was "an eminently suitable aspiration for the Millennium to be marked in some way by some symbol in the church." He also noted that, although there were 19 parties opponent, the majority of the village were in favour of the proposal. The Chancellor granted a faculty.

The Petitioners sought a Faculty to replace the existing tower clock dial with one made from Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) and restoration of the existing clock hands and dial motion works. The Diocesan Advisory Committee did not support the proposal to replace the clock dial with one made of GRP. Historic England also opposed the proposed GRP dial, which they claimed would be harmful to the significance and architectural and historic interest of the Grade I listed building through the loss of historic fabric. The Chancellor determined not to grant a faculty.