The Chancellor granted a faculty to authorise the installation of an electronic bird deterrent, in order to discourage pigeons from nesting in the north porch of the church and fouling the stonework. The deterrent consists of wires laid into a rubberised strip, which gives a mild electric shock to birds landing on it. The judgment contains a discussion of the relevant legislation relating to the protection of wildlife.

The petitioner wished to exhume the cremated remains of her mother and reinter them in the same churchyard with the remains of her father. It had been intended that the plot into which the petitioner's mother's remains had been interred should have been a double grave, but when the petitioner's father died it was found to be impossible to add the father's remains to the grave, due to insufficient depth. Also, the grave could not be enlarged due to concrete obstructions. Therefore the petitioner's father's remains had to be put in a nearby grave. The Chancellor considered that a mistake had been made, in that those digging the mother's grave should have been aware that a double plot was required and that the plot itself was not suitable for a double interment. He therefore granted a faculty of the exhumation of the mother's remains and their reinterment in the grave of her husband.

Faculty granted for the sale to the National Maritime Museum of two flags taken from the Battle of Trafalgar, one a Union Flag from HMS Minotaur, the other an Austrian ensign believed to have been taken from the Spanish ship Neptuno.

The petitioners wished to erect an octagonal extension with a link to the existing north door of the church to provide facilities for a clergy vestry, a meeting room with mezzanine, 2 WCs (including one for disabled), a kitchenette, choir robe store and general storage. This would involve building over graves and the moving of four upright stones and four kerb sets. Objections were received from six people whose family graves would be affected by the proposals. Faculty granted. Chancellor: "... in my judgment the petitioners have demonstrated a clear need for the proposed extension and I am satisfied from all the information available that the nature, design and location of the building are all entirely appropriate and fulfil the intended purpose. It is a matter of regret that established grave sites and markers will be affected by the erection of the new building, but I have reached the conclusion that the proposed extension is necessary if the mission and functioning of the church is to be maintained and developed and that the benefits for the church and for all who use it outweigh the adverse impact on the grave sites."

The petitioners proposed the creation of a social space, including a kitchen hub, at the west end of the south aisle of the church. Which is the most modern part of the Grade I Norman church. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the works did not impact the historical and architectural significance of the church building.

A large scheme of reordering was proposed, with the aim of improving the experience of worship and also creating flexible spaces at the front and rear of the nave to facilitate increasing community events. There were objections to (inter alia) the relocation of the chancel screen to beneath the east window and the removal of some pews (which were said by the Twentieth Century Society to be part of the works carried out by Sir Ninian Comper in 1915); the division of the twentieth century lectern/priest’s desk designed by the architect George Pace; and the relocation of the pulpit. The Chancellor decided that the proposed changes were well argued, and she therefore granted a faculty.

Faculty for exhumation granted, due to exceptional circumstances (following guidance in Re Blagdon), namely, medical reasons.

Various items of reordering of the church were proposed. Several concerns and objections had been expressed by the statutory consultees, and revisions to the plans had been made. The Chancellor granted a faculty based on the revised proposals. The judgment contains some advice to petitioners in general concerning adequate consultation with the statutory consultees and the preparation of clear plans and specifications, particularly where plans and specifications have been amended.

The proposal was to install a buried LPG tank in the churchyard, with pipes leading to the church building. This was intended to power an LPG boiler, which would in turn power the new underfloor heating system which formed part of the works authorised by a Faculty granted in 2023. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had considered with some care the Church of England’s guidance towards achieving net zero and she accordingly granted a faculty. 

In 2000 the petitioner's mother died and, in accordance with a wish expressed in her will, her body was interred in a double-depth grave in Stoneleigh churchyard. In 2021 the petitioner's mother's partner died and his body was interred, in accordance with a wish in his own will, in the same grave. The petitioner now applied for her mother's partner's body to be exhumed and reinterred elsewhere, so that the petitioner could be buried in the same grave as her mother in due course. The reason given for the proposal by the petitioner (but without supporting evidence) was that by 2000 the relationship between her mother and her mother's partner had ‘just about ceased’ and there had been an understanding that the petitioner would be buried with her mother. The Chancellor determined that there had been nothing unlawful in the burial of the partner and the petitioner had shown no exceptional circumstances to justify an exhumation.