A widow sought a faculty to authorise the installation of a kerb around and the laying of chippings and the introduction of a vase on her late husband's grave, which had previously been used for the interment of the remains of his great-uncle. The Parochial Church Council (PCC) objected but did not become a party opponent, and declined to make any further representations other than saying that it wanted to observe the diocesan churchyard regulations. The chancellor referred to his judgment in the case of Re St Leonard, Birdingbury [2018] ECC Cov 1, in which he set out his understanding of the principles to be applied when a faculty was sought for a memorial falling outside the range which diocesan churchyard regulations authorised incumbents to permit without a faculty. In short, a good reason was needed to justify the grant of such a faculty.

In this case the chancellor decided that there were exceptional circumstances to justify the grant of a faculty, even though the proposals were outside the churchyard regulations. The impact of the proposed kerbs on the maintenance of the churchyard was considerably less than would normally be the case. The grave in question had previously had kerbs, which had been moved 20 years earlier, and the incumbent at the time had assured the petitioner that there would be no problem in reinstating kerbs after the next burial in the grave. There were also already many examples close to the grave of kerbs, chippings and multiple vases, such that refusing to allow another set would be artificial and unfair. Although the chancellor was conscious of the burden placed on PCCs in maintaining churchyards, and of the weight to be given to their views as to what was appropriate or desirable in a particular churchyard, those views must carry rather less weight in the present case than might have otherwise been the case given the paucity of the information before him as to the particular reasons for the PCC's stance. He granted the faculty. [Jonathan Storey]