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 20 January 2022

Index by Dioceses of 2021 judgments on this web site.

Reordering

Display:

The Chancellor granted a faculty for reordering in the Grade I listed church, in order to provide toilet and kitchen facilities, screening off of the north transept and the provision of storage. The Chancellor was satisfied that the degree of harm to the significance of the church as a building of special architectural or historic interest would not be substantial and the public benefit of the works would outweigh any harm. Also, the changes would be entirely reversible, with negligible impact on the fabric.

Extensive reordering works were proposed for the Grade I church. There were several written objections, but none of the objectors wished to be a party opponent. There were no objections from the amenity societies consulted. The Chancellor, being satisfied that the petitioners had made out a good case for the works (" ... the proposed changes will result in greater liturgical freedom, pastoral well-being, involvement of the congregation, opportunities for mission and use of the church generally"), granted a faculty.

Extensive reordering works were proposed for the Grade I church. There were several written objections, but none of the objectors wished to be a party opponent. There were no objections from the amenity societies consulted. The Chancellor, being satisfied that the petitioners had made out a good case for the works (" ... the proposed changes will result in greater liturgical freedom, pastoral well-being, involvement of the congregation, opportunities for mission and use of the church generally"), granted a faculty.

The proposal was for two new glass porches, at the north and south entrances of the Grade I church. There was an issue about the north porch. Historic England felt that the new woodwork should reflect the woodwork in the rest of the church, whereas the petitioners favoured a design to match the woodwork of the adjacent shop and servery in the north-west corner of the church. The Chancellor considered that the wordwork of the new north porch should relate to the modern design of the adjacent servery, and he granted a faculty accordingly.

The Dean of Arches granted to the Victoria Society leave to appeal on restricted grounds in respect of a judgment by the Chancellor of the Diocese of Peterborough relating to reordering proposals for the church of St. Botolph Longthorpe.

The Chancellor granted a faculty to authorise a major scheme of reordering, which included the removal of pews and their replacement with hardwood chairs and benches; moving the font and the organ; replacing the altar against the east wall and installing a free-standing altar at the west end of the chancel; and removing the rood screen. Notwithstanding the objections of ChurchCare, Historic England, and the Victorian and Twentieth Century Societies, the Chancellor was "satisfied that the reordering is part of an overall holistic scheme for a thriving church community, which will be a major public benefit outweighing any harm."

A re-ordering project included the removal of all of the nave pews and their replacement with chairs; the installation of a new kitchenette and chair store at the west end of the building; the relocation of the font; and replacement of the dangerous wooden pew platforms with a simple engineered timber floor. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty: "... the circumstances and needs of the parish relied upon at present do not justify the changes sought because those needs can be met with a less harmful scheme."

The Vicar and Churchwardens applied for permission forĀ  the creation of a disabled access toilet, a relocated and expanded kitchenette area and the removal of some pews at the front and back of the main nave pew block to enable greater freedom of movement and flexibility of use, which would also help wheelchair users, who would not then have to use the central aisle. There were three objectors who did not become parties opponent. Their principal objections related to the proximity of the toilet to the new kitchenette and insufficient privacy for those using the toilet. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had made a good case for the proposals and granted a faculty.

Reordering proposals included: remove toilet, replace with servery and construct mezzanine with staircase and screen facing the nave; replace pews and pew platforms with 'Theo' chairs; new stone floor; repositioning of the font; electrical heating, lighting and audio-visual works; internal redecoration; and relocation of the chancel screen. The greatest concerns of the amenity societies related the mezzanine and stairs. The Chancellor was satisfied that the works were appropriate and granted a faculty subject to conditions.

The petitioners wished to introduce sixteen upholstered Alpha A1LE chairs together with four dining tables into the north aisle of the church, from which the pews had been removed in 1997. The vicarage had recently been sold, resulting in the loss of a room for church meetings. The tables and chairs would be used for refreshments and fellowship after church services and for meetings of the Parochial Church Council. Although satisfied that a case was made for tables and chairs, the Chancellor was concerned that the particular chairs chosen would "have a real impact on the appearance and special significance of this grade II* church. They will strike a discordant note and will detract from the overall character of the interior." He therefore refused to grant a faculty, but invited the petitioners to consider alternative chairs in consultation with the Diocesan Advisory Committee.