The church bell was found to be damaged in 2016, and was removed for safe keeping. The petitioners sought a faculty for its repair and re-hanging, to be funded largely by a legacy left by a member of the congregation. An objector stated that the minutes of the Parochial Church Council did not support the contention that the bequest was for this purpose; that the availability of only one quotation meant that there was no evidence that the cost was competitive; and that the project was an extravagance, when the provision of toilet facilities and upgrading of the heating would be more desirable than a bell ‘which serves no useful purpose’.

The court found that the bequest was intended specifically for this project and that it would have been wholly improper for those wishes to be ignored. Quotations from other firms in this limited field had been sought, but unsuccessfully. The statement of needs justified the work and, in any event, Canon F 8 required the presence of at least one bell in every church and chapel to ring the people to divine worship. The faculty was issued. [DW]