Mission and Pastoral Measure 2011 - Benefice of Hemel Hempstead

Permission to Appeal application lodged

Case summary
Permission to Appeal
Previous proceedings

Case summary

Case ID

JCPC/2025/0052

Jurisdiction

United Kingdom

Parties

Appellant(s)

Pete Stevenson

Respondent(s)

The Church Commissioners

Issue

Are the Church Commissioners for England (“CCE”) subject to the Equality Act 2010 duties when they are making a decision to reduce the number of vicars in a diocese pursuant to a pastoral scheme made under the Mission and Pastoral Measure 2011 (the “CPM 2011”)?

Facts

The Appellant, Reverend Peter Stevenson, is a vicar for the area of the benefice of Hemel Hempstead in the diocese of Saint Albans. The Appellant is a member of the parish of Warners End and Gadebridge (the “Parish”). The Appellant considers himself to have a “disability” for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. Following the Parish having low mission statistics and shortfalls in their ‘Parish Share’ contributions to the diocese, the Respondent, CCE, viewed this as an unsustainable situation. They began consultations under the CPM 2011 in respect of a pastoral reorganisation which would affect the Parish and reduce the number of team vicars in that diocese from four to two (the “Reorganisation”). It was decided that the Appellant’s office of team vicar would be terminated as a result. Following publication and consultation of the initial draft pastoral scheme effecting the Reorganisation and receiving responses, CCE published their final version of the draft pastoral scheme in March 2025 (the “Final Scheme”). In the Final Scheme, CCE noted that it had received 33 representations against and one in favour of the Reorganisation. However, CCE decided that the Final Scheme should proceed as drafted, with the consequent loss of the Appellant’s office. CCE considered that they had met their statutory duty under the MPM 2011. They considered that the cost considerations of the current structure were material and, if the current situation were to continue regarding the Parish, it would have negative effects elsewhere in the diocese. CCE noted in the Final Scheme that concerns were raised about the dispossession of the Appellant. CCE stated that the Reorganisation had not been brought forward in bad faith, nor was the scheme designed to discriminate against the Appellant. The Appellant now seeks leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council pursuant to section 12 of the MPM 2011 in respect of the Final Scheme.