The petitioner wished to reserve a grave space. It was estimated that there were enough grave spaces in the churchyard for a period of 11 years. The Chancellor had given a preliminary indication that he was prepared to grant a reservation for 11 years, but the petitioner had objected to such a short period. The normal period allowed in the Diocese of Oxford was 25 years. The Chancellor determined that a faculty should be granted to reserve a grave for 11 years, giving the petitioner leave to apply for an extension during the final year, when the Chancellor's successor could decide whether to allow an extension, depending on the circumstances at that time.

The petition proposed various reordering works to the Grade II church, including work on galleries and staircases and the provision of a lift and meeting rooms; and the sale of a painting from around 1600. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had made a good case for reordering works, and that the public benefit would outweigh such harm as would be occasioned to the building. He granted a faculty or the items of reordering, but reserved judgment on the sale of the painting pending further representations, including as to whether there should be an open court hearing.

The Chancellor authorised for each of two separate churchyards 'bespoke regulations' as to the types of memorial stone which may be permitted.

The petitioners proposed works to improve the entrance to the church by installing a disabled access ramp and creating a welcoming open area by modifying and removing a few pews and installation of bookcases, cupboards and noticeboards. There were several objections, but no objectors became parties opponent. The Chancellor was satisfied that a case was made for the proposals, apart from the removal of two half pews on the east side of the cross-aisle.

The cremated remains of the petitioners' mother, who died in 2016, were interred in the grave of her first husband, who died in 1978. The petitioners obtained approval from the acting priest during an interregnum to remove the headstone in memory of their late father, in order to have their mother's name added to the memorial. In the meantime, the mother's second husband of 32 years arranged for a tablet in memory of the petitioners' mother (including her surname after remarriage) to be laid on the grave. The petitioners wished the tablet to be removed. The Chancellor granted a faculty authorising the removal of the tablet subject to the condition that the headstone be amended by agreement between the petitioners and the second husband by adding words along the lines of: 'a widow for 5 years and for 32 years the beloved wife of N'. In the absence of agreement within 3 months, the Chancellor would invite the Archdeacon to petition for a faculty for the removal of both the headstone and the tablet and their replacement by a single memorial bearing wording directed by the Court.

The petitioner, a non-parishioner, wished to reserve a grave space in the churchyard for herself and her partner, next to the plot in which her father was buried. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty. There were only 50 available spaces, and burials averaged 7 a year. The petitioner, aged 31, was unlikely to die before the remaining spaces were required within about 7 years' time by those legally entitled to be buried in the churchyard, and so a reservation would prevent parishioners being buried in the remaining spaces.

The petitioners wished to erect a headstone on the grave of their uncle. The proposed memorial was to be dark grey granite, partly polished, with gold lettering, and bearing an engraved image of a motor cyclist with helmet and goggles on a racing motorcycle bearing the number 60, the number used by the deceased when he took part in motorcycle events, including the Isle of Man TT. As there were already several other polished stones in the churchyard, and the image was appropriate to commemorate the life of the deceased, the Chancellor granted a faculty.

The Petitioners wished to remove four pews, two from each side of the main aisle of the church nave, in order to provide a larger space for nave communions and village events, such as concerts. The Chancellor decided that any harm to the significance of the Grade II* listed building by the proposed removal would be ‘low’, but he only authorised the removal of three of the pews, as he considered that the removal of the fourth pew would provide very little extra space.

The petitioner wished to reserve a grave in the churchyard. She had lived in a house overlooking the churchyard for 51 years. Her mother was buried in the churchyard and it was proposed that in due time her father would be buried in the same grave as her mother. In February 2017 the Parochial Church Council had resolved unanimously that it would not support

The proposals included an extension to the south tower of the church, to include toilets, a plant room and storage; reordering, including glazed porch doors, removal of a kitchenette and a redundant organ, new heating, the carpeting of the nave and replacement of the pews with chairs. The Chancellor granted a faculty. Whilst he would normally be disinclined to approve carpet, in the present case it would cover the existing mixed floor finishes and provide 'a uniform homogenous flooring where currently it is patchy'.