Mr Dong Hong sought permission, with the support of his family, to exhume the remains of his deceased father, Tich Trinh Hong, from Plot 162 in Putney Vale Cemetery to re-inter them within Plot 279 in the same cemetery, both plots being within the consecrated sections. As the eldest son of the family, he wished to fulfil Vietnamese custom by exhuming and reburying his deceased father's body ten years after burial, in order to show respect to his deceased father, his deceased father's close relatives and the ancestors, on the basis that the surviving family, the children and grandchildren of the deceased would receive blessing from the ancestor, bringing them good health and luck from generation to the next generation.

The chancellor was satisfied that exhumation after ten years was a part of Vietnamese tradition, as confirmed in a letter from a priest at the Linh Son Temple at Upper Norwood, and that the petition was brought in good faith and reflected the petitioner's beliefs and those of his family. He was also satisfied that Articles 8 and 9 ECHR were engaged. He therefore granted the faculty: otherwise, Mr Hong and his family would be unable to manifest their religious beliefs. Although the right to manifest such beliefs is not an unfettered one, the chancellor did not think that the general arguments which otherwise strongly support the maintenance of the principle of the permanence of Christian burial in consecrated ground should prevail to prevent that manifestation. [Frank Cranmer]