The petitioners sought to reorder the parish church, including the removal of the font and pews (retaining some pews in the south aisle) and installing a wooden floor. The purpose was to facilitate a wider range of uses of the building for the purposes of mission and outreach, and in particular for a Café Church initiative in which worshippers sit at round tables. The Victorian Society objected and, in particular, criticised as wholly inadequate the Statement of Significance prepared by the petitioners. This statement had failed adequately to note the significance of the work of the Victorian architect Henry Woodyer in the reordering of the church in 1872. The chancellor was satisfied that, whilst the statement was inadequate, it had not affected the decision of the DAC to recommend the works proposed, and that it had been replaced with a satisfactory statement prior to the hearing. The chancellor considered the Bishopsgate questions. He followed the decisions in Re St Mary the Virgin Essendon (2001) 6 Ecc LJ 415 and Re Holy Cross, Pershore [2002] Fam 1 in holding that outreach and mission are important considerations. He permitted the replacement of the pews with chairs, holding that the necessity outweighed the effect on the character of the building and permitted the installation of a wooden floor as being a visual and practical improvement on the current tiled floor. He refused to permit the removal of the font, which dates from medieval times and was altered by Woodyer in 1872, as its retention would have marginal negative impact on the proposed future use of the building. [WA]
No CrossRef data available.