An application was made for a faculty to exhume the cremated remains of James Thomas Padgett (interred in 1988) from the churchyard of St. Helen's Edlington, with a view to the remains being reinterred with the ashes of his wife, which were interreded in 2007 in Newport Cemetery, nearer to the home of the deceased's daughter, who also wished to have her ashes interred in due course in the same grave in the cemetery. The applicant stated that her osteo-arthritis now prevented her from travelling long distances. The Chancellor, applying the principles in Re Blagdon Cemetery [2002], did not find any special circumstances to justify him granting a faculty.

The Rector and Churchwardens petitioned for the introduction into the church of a memorial plaque in memory of a Flight Lieutenant in the Royal Air Force, who died in Iraq in 2003 and was buried at RAF Maham in Norfolk. The proposal was to place the memorial plaque next to an existing war memorial. The deceased had no connection with the parish, but his parents lived in the parish and regularly attended the annual Remembrance Sunday service. The Diocesan Advisory Committee recommended the work. However, the Chancellor, whilst mindful of the pastoral motivation behind the petition, refused to grant a faculty, as the deceased had no link with the proposed memorial location and he was already commemorated at Burntwood, where he grew up, at RAF Marham, where he had been based, and at the National Memorial Arboretum.

A faculty was sought for the removal of the existing 19th century glass quarries in the west window of the church, in order to incorporate a new stained glass window in memory of members of the Marshall family, who had close links with the church and were associated with the local engineering company Marshall & Sons & Co. The design incorporated a Marshall traction engine ploughing through a field and the design of a cross in the ploughed furrows. The Chancellor decided that the design of the window was appropriate in the context of the Marshall family's work and support for the church, and he accordingly granted a faculty.

By mistake, the same burial plot had been reserved for two families. The reservations had been made 30 years apart. The burial of a member of the first family had been carried out in 1977 and it was the expectation of the deceased’s sister, who had a terminal health condition, that she would be buried with her brother in due time, in accordance with the reservation of the grave. The ashes of two members of the second family to reserve the plot had been interred in the plot in 2008 and 2009. After the mistake came to light, an application was made to exhume the ashes interred in 2008 and 2009, and to reinter them elsewhere in the churchyard. Two members of the second family objected, but the Chancellor considered that greater harm would be caused to the first family if the petition were refused. He therefore granted a faculty.

The proposal was to build an extension on the north side of the Grade II* church, linked by a corridor, to provide toilets, a kitchen and a community room/classroom. The Deputy Chancellor determined that a good case has been made for the proposed extension and that the public benefits of the proposals were sufficient justification, despite the harm to the significance of the Grade II* listed building.

A parishioner had died and her cremated remains were interred in the churchyard extension. The family applied to have a "desk style memorial" placed over the grave. Being informed that such a memorial would not be allowed under the Churchyards Regulations, the family agreed to a flat stone. By mistake the stonemason prepared a stone according to the original specification. On realising his error, the stonemason offered to replace the stone with a flat stone, but the
family would not allow him to do so. The Archdeacon applied for a faculty to have the desk style memorial replaced with a flat one. The Chancellor determined that it was appropriate to grant a faculty to the Archdeacon.

The Archdeacon applied for a faculty to authorise the removal from the churchyard of a "desktop" style memorial marking the interment of cremated remains, as it did not comply with the Churchyard Memorial Rules currently in force. The family of the deceased objected. The Chancellor determined that there were no exceptional reasons why the memorial should remain and accordingly granted a faculty to authorise the removal of the memorial and its replacement with a memorial which complied with the Rules.

A major reordering was proposed for the city centre church, which was in poor repair and little used, with a view to improving it for worship and attracting more community use. The works proposed a new entrance into the High Street (making it more accessible - the existing access being from Fish Street), replacing the kitchen, floor levelling, underfloor heating, new lighting and a new extension to house new toilets. The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings and the Victorian Society questioned the need to remove the east window for the insertion of the new doorway. The Chancellor considered, however, that a new large entrance would require the existing window opening and the stone panel beneath. He granted a faculty for all the works. He was satisfied that the works would "meet a clearly identified need, and that this outweighs any incidental loss of historic fabric or significance that may occur."

The Church of St. Helens is a very large church in the centre of the town, capable of seating 800 people. It was built in the 1920s and is listed Grade II. The petition proposed the permanent removal of 5 pews from the front of the  nave and 12 pews from the rear. Authority had previously been given by Archdeacon's Licence for the removal of the pews on a temporary basis. The reason given for the proposals was to provide more flexible space for church and community use. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the removal of such a relatively small proportion of the pew seating would not cause great harm to the church as a building of special architectural or historic interest.

The petitioners wished to remove fifteen free-standing pews from the unlisted Victorian church and replace them with timber framed upholstered chairs, in order to provide a felxible space within the nave. The Chancellor granted a faculty. The pews did not appear to have any particular architectural or historical significance, and any harm caused by their removal was easily outweighed by the significant benefit which would be gained in having a modern flexible worship space.