The petitioner local authority sought a confirmatory faculty for the unauthorised felling and removal of an ash tree from a closed churchyard in May 2024. The tree had fungus and ash dieback, with a risk assessment allowing nine months for its programmed removal; but no ecclesiastical permission had been sought before felling. The felling would have qualified for List B approval under B7(2)(a) for dangerous trees, if sought.

The proceedings were complicated by two concerning factors. First, the original petition falsely asserted a pre-existing agreement that safety works required no such permissions, despite the principle that agreements to circumvent the faculty jurisdiction were unenforceable. When challenged, the Council could provide no evidence of such agreement and belatedly amended the petition to delete this claim, though the Arbor Operations Manager had signed a statement of truth asserting its existence. Second, a member of the public who complained about the unauthorised felling had had his complaint rejected by the Council, despite correctly advising the tree workers on site that diocesan permission was required. The court noted the Council’s ‘widespread and institutional ignorance’ of the relevant principles of ecclesiastical law essential to discharging its statutory duties.

The court emphasised that consistory courts are amongst the most efficient courts, capable of rapid response including emergency faculties granted within minutes when necessary. The ‘unattractive mantra of the inert and indolent’ that it was easier to seek forgiveness than permission had no place in faculty jurisdiction.

A confirmatory faculty was granted, given that prospective List B approval would probably have been obtained. The court suggested voluntary compensatory planting as a ‘gracious gesture’, although this was not formally ordered.