The judgment followed on from an interim hearing and unsuccessful application for leave to appeal to the Court of Arches noted at (2010) 12 Ecc LJ 122. The interim order permitted a small amount of work to be carried out to prevent the lapse of planning permission. There were three parties opponent and the chancellor also took into account the views of a number of informal objectors. The chancellor reviewed the law on consultation, the burden of proof, the relationship between local planning authorities and the consistory courts, the Bishopsgate questions, erection of buildings in burial grounds and cost. He followed the pattern of other courts in holding that when planning permission had been granted the court was able to accept the reasoned decisions of that authority unless they were shown by cogent evidence to be wrong. In addressing the Bishopsgate questions the chancellor found that the current arrangements for children's activities in the church were not ideal, taking place at some distance from the church with consequent concerns about the integration of children into the life of the church and of safety getting to and from the church. Despite the relatively small number of children presently attending Sunday school the chancellor held that there was a very real need for proper provision for children's work if that number were to increase. He held that this increase was necessary for the continued mission of the church, that the proposed building was necessary and would not adversely affect the character of the church building. The faculty was granted. [WA]