The Twentieth Century Society raised objections to certain aspects of the various substantial repair and replacement works for which the petitioners sought a faculty, but chose not to be come a party opponent in the case. In granting the faculty the chancellor observed that interplay between rules 8(5) and 9(3) of the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules 2013 (continued in rules 9(5) and 10(3) of the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules 2015) may need reconsideration by the Rules Committee, as their combined effect could lead to procedural delay. On a strict reading, an amenity society which elects to send representations in the form of a letter under rule 9(5)(1)(a) of the 2015 Rules in preference to particulars of objection would appear to have a second opportunity of becoming a party opponent under rule 10(3). The chancellor considered that this could not have been the intention of those framing the Rules, given the finality suggested in the language of rule 9(5). [RA]