In a petition for a re-ordering, including the replacement of Victorian pews with chairs, the petitioners sought and the Diocesan Advisory Committee (DAC) recommended a faculty for upholstered chairs. The case for the removal of the pews was cogent and overwhelming. However, while the evidence clearly supported the replacement of the benches with chairs, it did not justify the introduction of upholstered chairs. The Church Buildings Council guidance in favour of unupholstered chairs was clear and must be given appropriate weight (leaving open the question of whether it constituted ‘statutory advice’ within the technical meaning of that term as applied in planning and other cases). Fabric on the seat and the back of chairs tended to give historic churches a domestic appearance unbefitting of sacred space, even when the church was put to additional community uses. The reasoning of the DAC in recommending the use of upholstered chairs was neither clear nor compelling.

Adopting the practice commended in re St Peter & St Paul, Aston Rowant [2019] ECC Oxf 3, the court asked itself whether the proposal could be achieved in a less harmful manner. It was implicit from the balancing exercise that the petitioners’ proposals could be achieved in a less harmful manner, namely by the introduction of unupholstered chairs. [DW]