By two petitions the local authority sought permission for works at Camberwell Old Cemetery and Camberwell New Cemetery respectively. The proposals at Camberwell Old Cemetery involved addressing the contamination of a large stockpile, reducing its size and regrading it. The resultant terraced landform, accessed by new paths, would be used for around 700 new burials where currently there was no space. The proposals at Camberwell New Cemetery involved providing a new access path to an area hitherto not generally used for burials, in order to facilitate about 145 new burials. Planning permission had been granted in respect of the works, which formed part of the local authority's strategy to address the need for additional burial space. Written objections were received. The chancellor decided to determine the matter without a hearing on the basis of written representations, of which there were 619 in hard copy and 318 by email. The chancellor observed that there were essentially three categories of objection to the local authority's proposals: environmental concerns, in particular about the loss of trees; concern about flooding; and concern that the proposals did not display respect for the dead.

The chancellor noted as a general principle that, other things being equal, an application to use a consecrated burial ground as a burial ground was likely to be facilitated by the consistory court, except where the proposals did not respect the remains of the dead. Here the proposals did not involve the physical disturbance of any grave or the exhumation of human remains from any grave. Although it was neither appropriate nor respectful of the dead for an area of the cemetery which had been used for burials to be the subject of tipping, the question now was whether, the resulting pile of spoil having been appropriately landscaped, there was any objection to using it for further burials, those burials being at a higher level than those that had already taken place and thus overlying the existing burials. The chancellor found that there was not. The proposals for the 48 unmarked war graves were not objected to by the Commonwealth War Graves Commission and were respectful of those who died in the world wars. Finally, there was nothing objectionable in the creation of a footpath over land which had been used for burials. The concern about flooding was unsubstantiated and the felling of trees, even significant ones, was justified by reference to the benefits flowing from the proposals. If there had been clear and compelling environmental objections to the proposals then, given the particular importance which the church attached to the environment, it would not have been appropriate to permit them. Overall, the proposals would help to ensure that in the future those living in Southwark who wished to be buried in consecrated ground would continue to be able to do so. It was appropriate that, if possible, the faculty jurisdiction should facilitate this. [Jonathan Storey]