Judgment Search

Churchyards

Display:

The priest in charge and a churchwarden sought permission to reuse for burials two areas of the churchyard, which had not been used for burials since 1850. The Commissary General determined that it was appropriate to use the areas for reburials and she granted a faculty. For the benefit of other parishes in the diocese, she indicated that reburial would normally be allowed where there had been no burials in an area to be reused for at least 75 years.

The petitioner wished to apply fine shingle or fine gravel to the area within the kerbs of two graves, for the purpose of weed suppression. The Parochial Church Council ("PCC") opposed the proposal, as the Churchyard Regulations provided that “kerbs, railings or chippings, whether raised or at ground level, are not permitted", and the PCC had been endeavouring to enforce the regulations. They would have preferred the kerbs to be removed. The Commissary General considered the factors in favour and against allowing the proposal and decided, on balance, to grant a faculty: there was no petition for the removal of the kerbs; the introduction of fine shingle would not make mowing or strimming more difficult; the appearance of fine shingle was more natural than chippings; and the fine shingle would slow down the growth of weeds.

The petition related to improvements to the entrance and pathways to the church. This involved removal of a large number of old memorials which had been laid as paving during the 1900s. These memorials were inclined to be slippery underfoot when wet, giving rise to health and safety concerns. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to a condition that within nine months a report should be submitted concerning progress on the work and as to the most appropriate way to deal with the old memorials removed from the pathways.

The Chancellor granted a faculty to authorise the removal of a large yew tree growing close to the south wall of the nave of the church.

Faculty granted for improvements to the site of the former parish church, which includes the site of the town's war memorial.

The Caister Joint Burial Committee proposed to remove and relocate all memorials from an old section of the parish cemetery, to allow for an ordered reuse of that area for further burials. There were objections from two relatives of persons buried in the 1890s. The Chancellor determined that the petitioners’ need to clear an area for reuse must outweigh the wishes of the objectors, but directed that the two memorials concerned should be carefully relocated to the boundary of the cemetery.

The London Borough of Southwark presented two faculty petitions containing landscaping proposals for consecrated areas of the Camberwell Old Cemetery and the Camberwell New Cemetery respectively. 660 people submitted objections in writing and a further 318 people objected by email. Three of the objectors became parties opponent, but later withdrew as formal objectors. The proposals were designed to provide additional burial space. The Chancellor was satisfied with the proposals and granted a faculty.

Christ Church Fulwood is listed Grade II and has an average Sunday attendance over four services of 887. The proposed works included the creation of a courtyard in the churchyard, between the church and the road, in order to provide better access and a circulation area. There was also a proposal to replace the pipe organ with an electronic instrument in order to provide more seating space. The proposal for the new courtyard was opposed by a married couple, as there were some old family graves in the area affected by the proposal. The Church Buildings Council was "uncomfortable with the proposal to remove the pipe organ to replace it with an electronic instrument". The Chancellor granted a faculty for both items.

Faculty granted for the felling of two trees which were causing damage to a nearby house.

Proceedings for a restoration order in respect of a building erected on a consecrated burial ground were stayed by the Chancellor of the Diocese. The applicants appealed. The Court of Arches directed that the matter be referred back to the Deputy Chancellor of the Diocese (or a Chancellor of another Diocese) for consideration as to whether the building had been erected in the consecrated churchyard, contrary to the provisions of the Disused Burial Grounds Act 1884 and appropriate disposal of the matter.