The Ecclesiastical Judges, Legal Officers and Others (Fees) Order 2026 resets the fee regime for a wide span of Church of England court, faculty and discipline work. The text published on legislation.gov.uk shows the Order was made on 11 July 2026, laid before Parliament on 31 July 2026 and will come into force on 1 January 2027, after approval by the General Synod as required by section 86(11) of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and Care of Churches Measure 2018. In practical terms, the Order revokes the 2025 fees order and replaces it with a fresh schedule for judges, registrars, chancellors, vicars-general and other office-holders. It is a tariff update rather than a rewrite of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, but it still matters for parishes, cathedral bodies, clergy respondents, registrars and diocesan finance teams that need to plan case costs ahead of the 2027 start date.
According to the Explanatory Note, the Order covers faculty proceedings in consistory courts, appeals from those courts, reviews under the Care of Cathedrals Measure 2011, proceedings in the Vicar-General’s courts, cases before the Court of Ecclesiastical Causes Reserved, clergy discipline proceedings and election appeals under General Synod rules. The breadth is important because the Order aligns charges across several separate church-law routes that are often administered by different bodies. It also preserves special reading rules for Canterbury: references to the consistory court are to be read as references to the commissary court, and references to the chancellor as references to the Commissary General.
One of the clearest changes appears in article 3. On submission of a faculty petition concerning a building, part of a building, its curtilage, or a fixed object or structure within the faculty jurisdiction, a fee of £247 becomes payable to the diocesan board of finance for work carried out in relation to the petition by the diocesan advisory committee or an archdeacon, whether that work is done before or after submission. That fee is not automatic in every case. The Order allows the diocesan board of finance to waive all or part of it, having regard to financial contributions already made to diocesan funds by those responsible for the building or by another person with a substantial connection to it. No fee is payable under this article for buildings covered by a sharing agreement or for a chapel forming part of Lambeth Palace, which gives a narrow but clear set of exceptions.
Article 2 gives chancellors and registrars room to set a fee at any level up to the amount specified for the case in question, rather than requiring the maximum figure in every instance. That drafting point gives office-holders some discretion, but it also means parties may need early confirmation of likely charges when budgeting for a petition, application or hearing. The Order also keeps two important cross-references to wider fee systems. Article 4 links certain searches and copies from the register of patrons to the Solicitors’ (Non-Contentious Business) Remuneration Order 2009, while article 5 provides that where no fee is specified for a consistory court matter, the equivalent High Court fee under section 92 of the Courts Act 2003 applies. For several listed items, the relevant judge or registrar must certify the hours spent, signalling that time recording will remain central in more complex or exceptional work.
The middle articles extend the revised tariff across appeals and specialist jurisdictions. Articles 6 to 10 cover appeals from consistory courts, reviews of certain decisions under the Care of Cathedrals Measure 2011, proceedings in the Vicar-General’s courts, cases before the Court of Ecclesiastical Causes Reserved, and reviews by a Commission of Review where the provincial registrar acts as registrar. For church bodies, the main point is not only the existence of fees but who carries them. In a number of these routes, the Archbishops’ Council is identified as the paying body; in others, liability rests with the person directed to pay or with the party using the relevant service. The Order also draws distinctions within appellate courts: in some provincial court work, separate fees are payable to each participating member, while equivalent payments are disapplied to members of the Court of Ecclesiastical Causes Reserved for certain items.
Articles 11 to 15 deal with clergy discipline, appeals and several related appointments. Proceedings under section 10 of the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 attract the fees set out in Table 7, with the Archbishops’ Council paying under the statutory route referenced in the Order, and appeals under section 20 are dealt with separately in Table 8. The Order also fixes two clear payments for a person appointed to act instead of the President of Tribunals under section 4(4) of the 2003 Measure: £240 for a series of procedural or permission decisions, and £463 for more substantial review or determination work, including reviews of dismissals and certain safeguarding-related decisions. Summary election appeals under the current 2026 election rules are also brought within the fee structure, with the judge required to certify hours spent. Article 15 then preserves a separate category of miscellaneous and annual fees, with payment routes split between the Archbishop, the Church Commissioners by reimbursement, and the Archbishops’ Council depending on the item.
Article 16 is one of the most practically significant provisions. It imports into ecclesiastical proceedings the same broad approach to exemptions, reductions and remissions that applies under the Civil Proceedings Fees Order in the civil courts. Where that secular order would excuse or reduce a court fee, an equivalent outcome is available under this Order. The administrative route, however, is adapted for church use. Applications go to the registrar, the registrar exercises any discretion that the civil order would give to a specified decision-maker, and the diocesan board of finance must meet the amount that would otherwise have been paid together with the reasonable costs of determining the remission application. That is important for access to the system, but it also shifts a direct financial responsibility onto diocesan bodies.
The closing provisions mean the headline figures will not always be the final bill. Most fees, other than the faculty-petition fee in article 3, may be increased to reflect reasonable travel, subsistence, accommodation and hearing costs, and article 18 states that VAT is payable in addition where chargeable. For parties comparing costs with the 2025 order, the scheduled fee should therefore be treated as a starting figure rather than a full ceiling. Before 1 January 2027, dioceses, registrars, parishes and cathedral administrators are likely to review templates, guidance notes and case budgets against the new order. The legislation.gov.uk text and its Explanatory Note make clear that the instrument is intended to replace the previous fees regime in full, while preserving fee remission routes and the existing division of responsibility between diocesan bodies, the Archbishops’ Council and other church authorities.