The chancellor granted a faculty for the replacement and enhancement of an existing sound-amplification system. The Church Buildings Council (CBC) and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB) objected to the additional request for the installation of a projector screen which, when in use, would act as a barrier between the high altar and the rest of this thirteenth-century Grade I listed church. When not in use, the screen would be rolled up into a neutral coloured boom and swung back behind a pillar. CBC and SPAB both argued that a faculty should be refused for the installation of the screen on the basis that potential advances in technology might mean that a less intrusive and damaging solution might become possible in the future.

In applying the Duffield questions, the chancellor held that the introduction of the screen was harmful to the interior of the church, but that that harm was small. The screen's presence would be jarring when open, although less so when in use, as it would then be fulfilling its purpose. It could be swiftly and discreetly hidden behind the pillar when not in use. The chancellor held that the arguments about potential advances in technology would be an entirely speculative basis upon which to refuse the petition. He was satisfied that the petitioners were sensitive to the need to maintain the building appropriately and would be alive to the chance to apply to alter the screen if appropriate technology developed. The faculty was granted. [RA]