Judgment Search

Downloads

Click on one of the following to view and/or download the relevant document:

Alphabetical Index of all judgments on this web site as at 4 June 2020

Index by Dioceses of all judgments on this web site, as at 4 June 2020

Reordering

Display:

A proposed extensive reordering was proposed. The works included: removal of pews, new chairs, a "welcome counter", a WC, a prayer chapel, a glass screen, a kitchen, removal of a pipe organ, new heating, lighting, and a parking area. The Chancellor was satisfied that there was a need for the works and granted a faculty.

The proposals were for a major reordering of the Grade II* church, which would cost over £500,000. There were seven parties opponent. The proposed works included the replacement of the nave pews with oak chairs; replacement of the Victorian tiles in the nave with sandstone flooring; the replacement of the existing vestry and boiler room with a new extension to house a parish room, toilet and kitchen; the provision of a servery; and other items to which there were no objections. Notwithstanding the objections, the Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the harm to the building would be modest, that the justification for the works was strong, and that the public benefit would outweigh any harm caused to the building.

The proposed works for the Grade II church included the replacement of the nave pews with oak chairs; the creation of a kitchen and Community Cafe; the installation of a disabled toilet; the creation of storage facilities; and new porch doors. Upon consideration of the guidelines laid down in Re St. Alkmund Duffield [2012], the Chancellor determined to grant a faculty: " ...this seems to me to be a clear case where significant public benefit (including benefit to the listed building considered as such) outweighs modest harm so that I give a positive answer to the fifth of the Duffield questions."

The Vicar and Churchwardens of the unlisted Victorian church petitioned to remove the existing stone font (installed in 1975), situated at the north-east end of the nave, near the pulpit, and to replace it with a new portable solid-oak font, retaining the original font's bowl and cover. There was one letter of objection. The Chancellor granted a faculty, subject to a condition that, when not in use, the font should be positioned at the west end of the church. The Chancellor also authorised the disposal of the stone font, provided that if it could not be used in another church or appropriate setting, it should be buried in the churchyard.

A reordering programme was proposed, including: installation of kitchen and toilets; installation of a ‘heritage display’ and meeting room; creation of ceramic tile heritage pavement; removal of pews; creation of a ringing gallery;  window repairs; clock repairs; restoration of a chest; installation of a sound system; installation of a heating system; repair to gates. The Chancellor granted a faculty for the majority of the works. In particular, he excluded the tiled heritage pavement.

Whilst acknowledging the success of a recent major internal reordering of the church, Historic England were unhappy about proposals to install new audio-visual equipment, namely, screens in the aisles, fixed to the pillars, and replacement loudspeakers. The Chancellor was satisfied with the need for the equipment, and agreed to the proposals, subject to conditions that: (1) the screens would have a white or no border, so that they would blend with the white background; (2) the screens would be no wider than the pillars; (3) the Diocesan Advisory Committee should approve the fixings and (4) the loudspeakers should be four steerable beam loudspeakers at high level.

The faculty petition proposed the installation of a new font bowl and also a new stained glass window, which would replace a clear glass window near the font. There were two letters of objection in respect of the window. Applying the principles laid down in Re St. Alkmund Duffield [2012] (Court of Arches), the Chancellor was satisfied that any harm to the building would be minimal and that the design was appropriate, and he therefore granted a faculty.

The petitioners sought a faculty to permit the replacement of the heating system in the Grade I listed church and the removal of the Victorian nave pews and their replacement with chairs. One parishioner and the Victorian Society objected, but neither wished to be a party opponent. The Chancellor decided that the public benefit resulting from the proposals outweighed the harm which would be caused and that therefore a faculty should issue.

The proposals were to install lavatories and re-locate the kitchen servery, removing 10 (of a total of 60) pews from the end of the nave and 6 pews from the east end of the nave. The objective was to improve health and safety, create a better area for families during baptism, and to provide a more usable area for a wide range of activities alongside the provision of worship. The Victorian Society objected to the number of pews to be removed, but it did not become a party opponent. The Chancellor determined that a moderate degree of harm would be caused to the building, but that this could be justified by the church's needs.

The petition sought approval for the replacement of moveable audio-visual equipment with permanently fixed equipment in a Grade I listed late 14th century church, which would involve the removal of three pews to make room for a mixing desk. There were two parties opponent and three other objectors and the matter was determined on written representations. Faculty granted subject to conditions that (1) all equipment was to be indelibly marked, (2) certain equipment should be fitted with tracker devices and (3) the mixing desk should have front and sides made from the pews that would be removed.