Display:

The Chancellor refused to allow a design of the Masonic square and compasses to be added to a memorial to the Petitioner's late husband, who had been a Freemason for forty years, latterly holding high office in Freemasonry.

During the parish priest's absence, whilst attending a course, a burial took place in the closed churchyard. Prior to his absence, the priest had told the funeral director and the family that a burial could not take place, unless in accordance with one of the exceptions in the Order in Council closing the churchyard for burials, namely: (1) where a grave had been reserved by faculty; (2) where a person could be buried in the same grave as a relative. (Also, cremated remains can be buried in a closed churchyard.) The funeral director arranged for the deceased to be buried next to the deceased's brother in a tight space between two graves. The Chancellor determined that the interment was unlawful, and could not be made lawful retrospectively by the Ministry of Justice or the court, but he decided that no action should be taken to disturb the burial or to refer the matter for police investigation.

The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty for the reservation of a double grave, as there were very few empty grave spaces left in the churchyard.

A mother wished to have her son's body exhumed from the churchyard of St. Patrick Earlswood and reinterred in a churchyard in Ireland, where she now lived. Here reason for the request was that if her son;s body remained in England, she would have difficulty in visiting and tending the grave regularly. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty. The petitioner had not shown any exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty.

The Parochial Church Council wished to install solar panels on the roof of the unlisted Victorian church in order to reduce its energy bills. The Deputy Chancellor was satisfied that "the visual impact of the solar panels will be relatively modest and can be accommodated without serious impact on the heritage value of the building", and he granted a faculty.

The Chancellor granted an interim faculty for the removal of furnishings for cleaning following damage to the church by fire. He also authorised the removal of the pews into storage, the removal of a dais, and cleaning and redecoration.

The vicar and churchwardens wished to replace the church pews with chairs. The Chancellor was satisfied that the replacement of the pews with chairs was appropriate in the church and granted a faculty.

The petition proposed replacing the existing pew benches with new moveable pew benches by the ecclesiastical furniture designer Luke Hughes, and retaining the best examples of the current pews by their removal to the gallery. Historic England and the Victorian Society submitted objections, but did not become parties opponent.  The Chancellor granted a faculty. The pews introduced following the rebuilding of the church (known as "the Actors' Church") in 1795-6 had been adapted in a reordering in 1871-2, and were now in a very poor state of repair. The Chancellor considered that any harm to the architectural interest of the church would be low and the harm to the historical interest would be moderate. He found that the petitioners had made a convincing case for the proposals. The church would benefit from the introduction of moveable pew benches, which would provide improved seating and allow greater use of the church for services, events, concerts and commercial hiring.








The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty for the demolition of the church on grounds of health and safety, as it might be possible to secure the safety of the church by remedial measures.

The petitioner, on behalf of herself and her six siblings, sought a faculty to authorise the exhumation of her brother's cremated remains from their parents' grave and reinterment in a nearby new grave. The deceased's daughter, believing it had been her father's wish to be interred with his parents, had arranged the interment without consulting the deceased's siblings, who only learned about the interment after it had taken place. It caused them great distress that there had been another interment in their parents' grave. The Chancellor was satisfied that there were exceptional circumstances to justify exhumation, as the grave had "become a focus of disquiet and grievance amongst the family members with a real degree of distress to some."