In 2016 the chancellor had granted a faculty for re-ordering works at this Grade II* listed church, including the replacement of the existing pews with chairs. In his judgment at the time, Re Holy Trinity, Long Itchington [2016] ECC Cov 7, he declined to approve the introduction of the upholstered chairs for which the petitioners had sought permission, but authorised the introduction of un-upholstered chairs. Following a lengthy period of assessment and consultation, the petitioners subsequently sought an amendment of the 2016 faculty to authorise a different type of upholstered chair, with upholstered seats and upholstered back pads within a wooden frame.

Adopting the approach laid down in Re St Alkmund, Duffield [2013] 2 WLR 854, as modified in Re St John the Baptist, Penshurst [2015] 17 Ecc LJ 393, the chancellor considered whether the benefits to be obtained by the proposed works justified the harm to the special character of the church, noting that he must only permit works which caused the minimum amount of harm to that special character compatible with achieving the objectives which had been found to justify any such harm. After reviewing the options available, and the opinions of a number of interested parties, the chancellor concluded that, since the chairs were to have wooden frames with a dark stain applied to them, the additional visual impact of the upholstered back pads would be modest. That additional impact was outweighed by the benefits to be obtained, and by the fact that such chairs were the clear preference of the worshipping community after what he found had been careful consideration of the alternatives. The introduction of chairs with an element of upholstery was the minimum that was necessary to achieve the benefits sought. He therefore directed that the faculty granted in 2016 be amended accordingly. [Jonathan Storey]