Of the wide range of guidance issued by the Church Buildings Council (CBC), that entitled “Seating” is one of the more prescriptive, and last month we reviewed its application following recent consideration in the consistory courts. A further judgment has been handed down which re-states its advisory status, queries the rationale of an important aspect of this guidance, and raises important issues on the perception of aspects of the petition. Continue reading →
Cemetery development at the local and national level
Re St Peter Terwick ECC Chi 2 is a relatively straightforward case concerning the development of a churchyard through the re-use of land formerly used for burial. However, it is important since in addition to the Chancellor’s summary of the diminishing availability of space for burial, the judgment records “the exemplary manner in which the parish has set about converting its aspiration into reality”. The Chancellor suggests that “parishes elsewhere should not be deterred by the need to ‘lift and deepen’ or to re-position memorials”; furthermore, he indicates that in future cases, the court would be happy to give directions to address and determine preliminary issues where proposals for the reuse of graveyards are under consideration. Continue reading →
Today, Monday 7th August, the Director of the Cathedrals and Church Buildings Division of the Church of England, posted the following information on grants for church buildings on the CofE Facebook page. Continue reading →
A week that saw everything from an important ruling on the scope of the Guidance on the Prevent Duty to mistaken identity in a Cardiff pub..
The Prevent Duty, under which “specified authorities” – includiing schools and colleges – must show “due regard to the need to prevent people from being drawn into terrorism”, is somewhat controversial. Supporters insist that it is fundamentally about safeguarding students against all forms of extremism, while critics argue that Prevent predominantly targets – and stigmatises – Muslim communities. Continue reading →
In a previous post, Peter Edge, Professor of Law at Oxford Brookes, commented on the earlier debate on the position of the Bishop of Sodor and Man in Tynwald. In a cross-post from his own blog, he reports on the resumed debate.
In another very long session, Tynwald Court returned to the process of considering matters raised by the Lisvane Review on 18 July 2017, now available on rolling Hansard.
The most significant development was a discussion of the First Interim Report of the Select Committee on the Functioning of Tynwald – Remit and Work Plan. This report sought to inform Tynwald and members of the remit of the Select Committee, to set out a general plan of work, and to request “a modest change to our remit”. In particular, the Select Committee asked for the authority to consider whether MLCs should be able to vote on the appointment of the Chief Minister, whether the Lord Bishop should retain his vote, whether a sitting MHK should be eligible to be nominated as an MLC, and a number of changes to the draft Bill procedure. Continue reading →
A busy week, dominated by the tragic case of Charlie Gard.
We have been following the recent Charlie Gard case, but we refrained from reporting on day-to-day developments in the case because we felt that the issues involved were beyond our remit and the medical aspects were well outside our specific expertise. In his judgment in Great Ormond Street Hospital v Gard EWHC 1909 (Fam) Mr Justice Francis commented:
“A lot of things have been said, particularly in recent days, by those who know almost nothing about this case but who feel entitled to express opinions. Many opinions have been expressed based on feelings rather than facts” .
“The world of social media doubtless has very many benefits but one of its pitfalls, I suggest, is that when cases such as this go viral, the watching world feels entitled to express opinions, whether or not they are evidence-based” . Continue reading →