Display:

The works proposed included the conversion of an existing kitchen at the east of the north aisle to a new WC, with with disabled access and baby-changing facilities, and the creation of a new kitchen 'pod' in the north east corner of the north aisle. The Chancellor determined that the proposals would cause only moderate harm to the appearance of the Grade I listed church, which would be outweighed by the benefits of the new facilities. He therefore granted a faculty.

The church had been declared redundant in 2001 and in 2004 a lease for 99 years had been granted to a charity. The charity applied for a faculty to lay a foul drain through the  churchyard to take the waste from a disabled toilet which was to be installed in the church, to serve the needs of people attending the church for community events. A party opponent objected on the grounds that there was little need for community events in the church, that  the funds needed for the project could be better spent elsewhere, and that the village sewerage system was already stretched to the limit. The petitioners argued that, as the church had been used only twelve times in the previous year, the toilet usage would not overload the sewerage system. The Chancellor noted that the local authority had approved the proposal, and was therefore presumed not to be concerned about the laying of an additional drain in the village. Also, it was believed that there were no burials in the churchyard which would be affected by the laying of the drain. The Chancellor therefore granted a faculty.

The petitioners wished to erect a memorial on the grave of two family members. The Incumbent, churchwardens and PCC did not support the application. The Chancellor granted a faculty. The judgment includes a discussion of two subsidiary issues: (1) do the petitioners need to show some exceptional reason for the proposed memorial; and (2) is it open to the Diocesan Advisory Committee to change the advice it proffers to the parties and to the Chancellor and, if so, in what circumstances?

The Chancellor granted a faculty allowing a blue plaque to be placed on the outside of the church to commemorate Gordon Welchman, who had played a significant role in code-breaking at Bletchley Park during the Second World War, and whose father had been Vicar of the Parish.

A faculty was sought to allow an extension to the existing churchyard path, in order to facilitate access to an existing wooden bench in wet weather when the ground becomes very wet. There was one objection. The Deputy Chancellor granted a faculty.

The Chancellor granted a faculty for an extension to the church to provide a Church Room, Historic England and the Victorian Society having indicated that they had no objections to the proposal.

The associate minister and a churchwarden wished to remove from the churchyard two cedar trees, which were situated within 2 metres of the northern wall of a plant room, adjacent to the vestry.   In recent years the trees have been causing problems, dropping a large amount of debris on the roof on the north side of the church, choking gutters and downpipes, and causing rainwater to cascade down the wall. The quinquennial inspection report had advised removal of the trees due to the rainwater issues and also damage caused by tree roots. A couple whlo lived in the parish submitted a letter of objection. The local authority had agreed to the two trees being removed (the churchyard being in a conservation area), subject to two replacement trees being planted in the churchyard. The Chancellor found that there was a convincing case for the removal of the trees and granted a faculty.

The proposal was to replace a clear glass window in the south chapel of the church with a new, stained glass window of contemporary design (but incorporating two small original late medieval glass eagles). There was one party opponent, though several parishioners, including members of the Parochial Church Council, expressed their objections to the proposed design. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty. He was not satisfied that a convincing case had been made for the particular design in the particular location, such as to overcome the normal presumption against change. He was also concerned that the design of the window, if introduced, would be resented by a significant minority of the worshipping community.

The Rector and fellow petitioners applied for the Victorian church organ to be declared redundant and removed, whilst retaining the decorative front row of pipes between the chancel and the vestry behind. The description of works in the Statement of Needs decribed the works slightly differently by saying that the organ should be placed on the Redundant Organ List of the Institute of British Organ Builders ("IBO"). A report from the Church Buildings Council recommended that the organ was of sufficient quality to merit its relocation as a complete instrument and that it should be placed on the IBO list. The Deputy Chancellor declared that the organ was redundant and that the complete organ shall be put on the IBO list for a minimum of six months. He also directed that amended plans be prepared for the division of the chancel from the vestry using oak panelling.

The petitioners applied for a confirmatory faculty in respect of a memorial placed in the churchyard without permission. The Chancellor refused to grant a confirmatory faculty and granted a faculty for its removal by the team Vicar and churchwardens on the grounds that: (1) the installation without authority was a trespass; (2) the type of stone and colour of lettering were not authorised by the churchyards regulations; (3) part of the inscription (which suggested that a particular cancer treatment was responsible for the death of the person commemorated) was inappropriate; (4) there were concerns for safety, as the memorial was not installed by a member of the National Association of Memorial Masons; and (5)  'Allowing the memorial to remain fails to address the unfairness to others who correctly obtain appropriate authority and follow the Regulations'.