The petitioners sought a faculty for a new floodlighting system. It was designed to be as energy-efficient as possible in the light of concerns about climate change; it would include timeclocks and sensors to enable graduated lighting and narrow-beam spotlights to limit energy use. As a condition of the planning permission the lights would be turned off at 11 pm. Although the petition had the support of the Diocesan Advisory Committee and the archdeacon and was unopposed, the court considered the matter fully in the light of environmental concerns. The policy of the Church both at national and diocesan level is to reduce the Church's environmental footprint. The question raised was whether the floodlighting, which would be an inessential use of energy, was appropriate in the light of the aim to reduce environmental impact.

The chancellor acknowledged that people could legitimately come to different conclusions as to whether the faculty should be granted. He found that the additional energy consumption of the floodlights would be limited and that some harm would be offset by the use of a green tariff encouraging the use of renewable energy. He also noted that there is no requirement in granting a faculty that the work to be done be necessary; the test was that any harm caused be outweighed by the benefits to be derived from the work. In this case he found that the public benefit of lighting the Grade II* listed building's spire, which is known as ‘the needle of Kent’, would enhance the church as a place of mission and worship. Accordingly, the benefit of the floodlighting outweighed the harm that might arise to the environment by extra energy use, which the petitioners had used all efforts to mitigate. [Catherine Shelley]