In considering a petition for a confirmatory faculty for a memorial, the chancellor surveyed a number of decided cases that considered the approach to be taken where a petition sought authority for a memorial that could not be authorised under the diocesan churchyard regulations. One line of authority – exemplified by Re St John the Baptist, Adel [2016] ECC Lee 8 – took the approach that a petitioner who sought authority for a memorial which fell outside the scope of the diocesan churchyard regulations was not subject to a special burden of establishing an exceptional case: assuming that what was proposed was not contrary to, or indicative of, a departure from the doctrine of the Church of England in any essential matter, the petition was simply to be determined on its own merits. Another line of authority – exemplified by Re St Peter, Church Lawford [2016] ECC Cov 3 – required a substantial reason to be shown before a faculty would be granted for a memorial which fell outside the scope of the diocesan churchyard regulations and could not therefore be authorised otherwise than by faculty.

The chancellor held that, as there was no statutory basis for churchyard regulations, it was open to different chancellors to take different approaches when it came to petitions for memorials that could not be authorised by incumbents under regulations that each chancellor had made for his or her respective diocese. The approach previously taken in the Diocese of Coventry was taken by a number of chancellors and was a legitimate one: it was fair to those who had chosen memorials that came within the scope of churchyard regulations to require those who did not do so to show a good reason; and it reflected the role of regulations in expressing an understanding of what was generally acceptable and appropriate. Accordingly, the chancellor would continue to follow the approach he had indicated in Re St Peter, Church Lawford. [Alexander McGregor]