Keynsham Town Council sought a faculty  for "The laying flat on its appropriate grave any tombstone or other monument found on inspection to be unstable or dangerous in some other respect . Such permission to cover both past and future works."  The Council had already laid flat 178 memorials without a faculty. Notice of Objection was received from 20 members of the public, of whom some became parties opponent. The Chancellor decided that it was appropriate to grant a confirmatory faculty, but that a separate faculty would be needed for works in the future, and he set out conditions which would apply to future works.

There was an unopposed petition concerning a mother’s request to exhume the remains of her baby son, Robbie, who died in 2005 aged three weeks and was buried in the consecrated section of Kidlington Parish Burial Ground. The mother, then 19 and in deep distress, stated that she was never told the grave was consecrated or informed of the implications. She now suffered long-standing grief and psychological distress aggravated by the separation from her son’s resting place. She sought exhumation so that his remains could be cremated and kept with her at home. The Chancellor held that Christian burial in consecrated ground is normally permanent, but exceptional circumstances justified a faculty. The key “special factor” was an operative mistake: the mother’s lack of informed understanding that her child was being buried in consecrated ground. Additional factors included the tragic circumstances of Robbie’s life and death, the mother’s extreme youth and unsupported grief, the continuing impact on her mental health, and the full support of Robbie’s father and brother. The court accepted her intentions for the ashes, despite their divergence from traditional Anglican practice. A faculty was granted subject to conditions.

The petitioner’s son had died aged 16 in 2011 after being struck by a car driven by a drunken driver. His school had put pressure on the petitioner to have a funeral carried out before the GCSE period started, and the Coroner had told the petitioner that the only option at the time was burial, though the petitioner had preferred cremation. The petitioner was not informed that her son was to be buried in a consecrated part of the burial ground, nor of the legal implications of interment in consecrated ground. She now wished to have her son’s body exhumed and cremated, so that she could retain his cremated remains until her own death, when she wished his remains and her own to be buried together. The Chancellor considered that “there was a fundamental mistake of fact on the part of the petitioner as to the nature of the grave plot in which she had agreed to have her son’s body interred, and its legal consequences”. This and a number of additional special factors set out in the judgment led the Chancellor to decide that it was appropriate to grant a faculty.

A memorial was installed within a couple of years of the petitioner's father dying in 1946, when the petitioner was a small child. In 2011 the petitioner's cousin and her aunt decided to replace the original memorial with a black polished granite memorial with kerbs and green chippings, and the installation was carried out without faculty. The petitioner sought a faculty to authorise the removal of the second memorial and the erection of a replica of the original. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioner was the heir at law in respect of the first memorial, the person who purchased the memorial (assumed to be the petitioner's mother) having died. He accordingly granted a faculty to the petitioner.

As part of its policy on climate change, to reduce its carbon footprint, the College wished to place solar panels on both the north and south sides of the Chapel roof. The main arguments of the consultees against the proposal were that the panels would be partially visible through the parapet tracery from a few viewpoints. The Church Building Council also questioned whether panels on the north side of the roof could generate enough energy to justify them. The Chancellor was satisfied that the scheme would benefit the College and would help it towards reaching its net zero target. He determined that he would grant a faculty for solar panels on both sides of the roof, or on the south side only, dependent upon an updated assessment of the potential carbon payback for the north roof and calculations and observations as to the effect on the structure without an identical weight on the north roof, were the eventual decision to allow for solar panels on the south roof only.  The assessment should be produced within 28 days and provided to the DAC and other bodies who had been involved in the process, such assessment to be produced within 28 days and then submitted to the consultees for comment within a further 21 days.

A boy had died, aged 8, in 2023. Under pressure from the boy’s grandmother his body was buried near relatives in Kingston Cemetery. The boy’s mother, would have preferred cremation, suffered deep grief, for which she received medical treatment. Neither the parents nor their son were of the Christian faith, and some time later the parents learned that the boy’s body had been buried in a consecrated part of the cemetery. The mother, with the consent of the father, petitioned for exhumation, so that her son’s body could be cremated and the ashes interred elsewhere. Before the date for exhumation, the father, who had separated from his wife, withdrew his consent, stating that he had recently become a Christian and “the situation does not feel right to me.” The Chancellor set aside the faculty for exhumation and referred the case to the Deputy Chancellor, who considered that there were exceptional grounds to grant a faculty for exhumation and cremation. It had been a mistake in 2023 for the boy’s body to be buried in consecrated ground when the parents had previously declared themselves to be atheists.

A faculty was sought for the following in the unlisted church which was built in 1969-1970: replacement of the existing twenty pews with one hundred and twenty Alpha SB2M chairs and four stacking trollies; a data projector to the front archway; an overhead retractable screen to the wall above the reredos; a lighting bar and stage lights to the front archway; replacement of the existing sound desk housing with a larger housing to accommodate additional equipment. Two parishioners wrote a letter of objection, but did not become parties opponent. They claimed that there had been insufficient consultation in the parish and that the audio-visual equipment had already been installed. The Chancellor was satisfied that there had been adequate consultation and that the petitioners had made out a good case for the works. As for part of the works being completed already, the Chancellor accepted the explanation and apology given by the petitioners. A faculty was granted in respect of all the works.

A petition was brought to permit the exhumation of the remains of baby Kirby Enid Butcher, stillborn in 2004 and buried in Ireleth Cemetery. During a later burial in the same grave in 2025 her remains were unintentionally disturbed and partly reinterred in manner distressing to her family. The Chancellor reaffirmed the presumption of permanence of Christian burial but held that these exceptional circumstances plainly justified a faculty. Exhumation would restore dignity by ensuring Kirby’s remains were respectfully reunited and laid properly to rest in the family grave. The Council, whose workers were responsible for disturbing Kirby’s remains, were directed to pay the costs of the petition and of the exhumation.

Replacement of gas heating system with Hershel Halo Chandeliers, incorporating electric infra-red heating and up/down lighting; church, sometimes known as St Stephen’s, listed grade II*; significance of nave arch and 13^th century nave arcade noted; existing gas heated warm air system now inefficient and unreliable; written objections considered including cost, concerns over effectiveness of proposed system; potential harm to structure of church; impact on health and visual impact; no objections from statutory consultees; comments from Church Buildings Council considered; cost a matter for the PCC, subject to observation that a faculty should not issue if the PCC has no reasonable prospect of raising the necessary costs; inability to run the proposed system at full output without improved mains supply noted; system designed to avoid ‘cold spots’ by overlapping heated areas; effect on structure of the church considered and addressed by a requirement to monitor impact over the next 5 years; no evidence adduced of harm to health; visual impact on appearance of nave considered in the light of the Duffield tests (Re St Alkmund, Duffield [2013] Fam 158); new heating system would not change the appearance of the nave so as to cause harm to the significance of the church as a building of special architectural or historic interest; net zero goals considered and reflected in proposal; faculty granted subject to conditions.

The petitioner's late father, a Muslim, had been buried in a grave in part of the cemetery consecrated for burials according to the rites of the Church of England. It was unclear whether this had been pointed out to the family at the time of death (as none of the cemetery staff were in post when the father was buried), but probably not. Also, the burial had been limited to single depth, because of the ground conditions. The petitioner's mother, who had recently died, had been buried in an unconsecrated part of the cemetery. The petitioner stated that it had been the wish of his parents to be buried together. It had not been possible to bury the petitioner's mother in the same grave as her husband (even disregarding the fact that the grave was consecrated. The Chancellor decided that there were exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty to enable exhumation of the petitioner's father's remains, for reinterment in the unconsecrated grave where his mother was buried.