A petition by the incumbent and churchwardens for works to the south narthex of the church involved the removal of a pair of wooden doors, the reduction in size of a disabled lavatory cubicle to provide space for a crèche, the introduction of worktops, and associated electrical and drainage works. The public notices elicited 16 letters of objection from members of the congregation. The chancellor, while accepting that there were many understandable reasons why an objector might not wish to become a formal party opponent, noted that the absence of any formal opposition to the petition meant that evidence on oath as to the objections could not be heard or tested under cross-examination and that as a consequence he had no clear evidence as to the extent or merits of the objections. The cost of proposals was not an issue for the court unless what was proposed was wildly excessive or the parochial church council (PCC) was in default of its contributions to diocesan funds. Decisions about financial priorities were for the PCC to take. The court would not normally adjudicate on objections as to the suitability of a builder to carry out works where there was no expert evidence about that and the Diocesan Advisory Committee had not expressed any reservations. The petitioners had made out an overwhelming case based on need and desirability and a faculty was granted. [Alexander McGregor]