A major reordering was proposed for the city centre church, which was in poor repair and little used, with a view to improving it for worship and attracting more community use. The works proposed a new entrance into the High Street (making it more accessible - the existing access being from Fish Street), replacing the kitchen, floor levelling, underfloor heating, new lighting and a new extension to house new toilets. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings and the Victorian Society questioned the need to remove the east window for the insertion of the new doorway. The Chancellor considered, however, that a new large entrance would require the existing window opening and the stone panel beneath. He granted a faculty for all the works. He was satisfied that the works would "meet a clearly identified need, and that this outweighs any incidental loss of historic fabric or significance that may occur."

The Church of St. Helens is a very large church in the centre of the town, capable of seating 800 people. It was built in the 1920s and is listed Grade II. The petition proposed the permanent removal of 5 pews from the front of the  nave and 12 pews from the rear. Authority had previously been given by Archdeacon's Licence for the removal of the pews on a temporary basis. The reason given for the proposals was to provide more flexible space for church and community use. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the removal of such a relatively small proportion of the pew seating would not cause great harm to the church as a building of special architectural or historic interest.

The petitioners wished to remove fifteen free-standing pews from the unlisted Victorian church and replace them with timber framed upholstered chairs, in order to provide a felxible space within the nave. The Chancellor granted a faculty. The pews did not appear to have any particular architectural or historical significance, and any harm caused by their removal was easily outweighed by the significant benefit which would be gained in having a modern flexible worship space.

The Vicar of the parish sought a faculty for alterations to the church to improve accessibility, welcome and hospitality. The works included: reopening the baptistry entrance and the installation of an external platform lift to create an accessible entrance in the west facing elevation of the church; removal of four half pews from the baptistry area; extension of the slate floor to the area from which the pews were to be removed; reordering of the vestry extension to include a kitchen area in the choir vestry; storage facilities; an extra W.C.; a purpose built desk in the vicar’s vestry; and the creation of a new door in the northeast corner of the vestry. Notwithstanding eight objections, the Chancellor granted a faculty.

The remains of two parents and their daughter were interred in a grave, the daughter having been the last to die. There was a grey granite memorial to the parents on the grave. The petitioner wished to take down the memorial, crop it and lay it flat on the grave, and then put at the head of the grave a new memorial of Westmorland green slate in memory of the daughter. The Diocesan Advisory Committee ("DAC") and the Parochial Church Council ("PCC") disapproved of the proposal. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty. The DAC and the PCC did not support the proposal; the petitioner had not satisfied the Chancellor that the petitioner was the owner of the memorial to the parents; and Westmorland green slate would look out of place in the churchyard.

The petitioner wished to install in the churchyard a vertical slab memorial surmounted by a Celtic wheel style cross, the total height of the memorial being 39 inches. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty, but said that it would be appropriate for the incumbent to approve a stone of conventional shape with the incised design of a Celtic cross.

The petitioner applied for a faculty to authorise the installation of a dark grey, unpolished, upright granite memorial to mark the grave of his late wife. The proposed memorial fell outside the scope of the churchyards regulations for the Diocese of Oxford. The design incorporated two carved hearts. The petitioner wished to have a design similar to the one for his mother's memorial (for which a faculty had been granted) just a few feet away from the petitioner's wife's grave. The Chancellor granted a faculty. A faculty had already been granted to the family for a similar memorial; there was room in the churchyard for only about 12-15 burials, so the chances of further applications for similar memorials was small; and there were pastoral reasons supporting the grant of a faculty.

The petitioner wished to reserve a triple-depth grave for himself, his brother and his sister. The Parochial Church Council("the PCC") was opposed to the reservation of the grave, as it had maintained a policy of not supporting the reservation of gravespaces for at least forty years. The Chancellor found that there were exceptional reasons to allow the grant of a faculty: (1) the grave would be for three family members; (2) the graveyard already contained the graves of a number of members of the petitioner’s family; (3) there were concerns (undisclosed in the judgment) which were personal to the petitioner. The Chancellor also noted that, notwithstanding the policy of the PCC, members of the PCC were sympathetic to the petitioner's request.

The petitioner wished to erect in the churchyard a memorial of dark grey granite, polished on the face only, with silvered lettering within an incised design of an open book; the inscription included the words "Beloved Husband, Dad and Grandad". The proposal also included kerb stones and a granite vase bearing the inscription "John" within the kerbs. The Deputy Chancellor determined that the memorial would not be out of place in this particular churchyard, bearing in mind other memorials nearby, and he granted a faculty, subject to the vase not bearing an inscription.

The petitioner wished to place a memorial on her late husband's grave. Many of the details of the proposed design were outside the diocesan churchyards regulations, including: two coloured engravings, one of a robin and the other of a West Highland Terrier (to represent a deceased family pet); dark grey honed granite with a polished obverse side; gold lettering; the use of the words "Dad" and "Grandad" in the inscription; two flower holders in the base. The Parochial Church Council members unanimously did not support the proposal. Bearing in mind the context of the grave, which had near it other memorials with polished faces, the Deputy Chancellor did not approve the memorial design as proposed, but granted a faculty allowing: dark grey honed granite with a polished obverse side; white (rather than gold) lettering; the use of the words "Dad" and "Grandad" in the inscription; one flower holder only; the design of the dog, coloured white, but not the coloured design of the robin.