Talk:Arches Court

Untitled
Why exactly is this page named "arches court" instead of "court of arches"? Is this the result of over-zealous standardization? As an indication of the relative popularities of the two names, google gives 977 hits for the former (including some false hits caused by "arches, court of") and 3,750 for the latter. Of course, google isn't the be-all-and-end all; the real question is: how does it refer to itself? Doops | talk 28 June 2005 15:54 (UTC)

See http://www.cofe.anglican.org/about/churchlawlegis/canons/07g157-165.pdf and go to paragraph 2(a). I suspect, but do not know, that 'Court of Arches' is a typical bit of Victorian flummery which is why I gave the article the name that the CofE gives is with a redirect from the popular name. Saga City June 29, 2005 08:00 (UTC)


 * But see paragraph 5 on the same page --Henrygb 10:02, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Well spotted. I think that the document as a whole is in favour of Arches Court - anyone like to count the references? Saga City 11:31, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Right of appeal
"There is no appeal on matters which have been appealed from the Consistory Courts."

I'm not sure this is correct. There is a right of appeal to the Privy Council. If this position has changed then please cite a reference. Richard75 16:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)