[Bell Historians] Great Malvern

John H Allen john at 7objPVZi--aB5a7yaaBqnnkwZDen5k023beKIvgrLGv0Q5nZXOA-F6WJ12wYEI5M7tS2wyzdbjM_.yahoo.invalid
Mon Mar 9 22:09:03 GMT 2009

I think that this judgment sets a dangerous precedent. The Chancellor is
quoting Case Law from earlier Consistory Court judgements and this latest
decision will itself become a precedent.


The PCC voted in favour, the DAC supported it and EH, who have no statutory
role in the Faculty process, objected and  won the day. So much for the
Clause 1 of the 1991 Measure which read as follows:-


Part I General Principle 

1 Duty to have regard to church's purpose 

Any person or body carrying out functions of care and conservation under
this Measure or under any other enactment or rule of law relating to
churches shall have due regard to the role of a church as a local centre of
worship and mission


The report also seems to suggest that a so called expert changed his view
depending on who engaged him.


I agree with Andrew that the future is bleak for the replacement of old
frames and as a consequence more bells will become unringable.







No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.9/1990 - Release Date: 03/09/09

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/pipermail/bell-historians/attachments/20090309/a429b9c2/attachment.html>

More information about the Bell-historians mailing list