This Measure confers the jurisdiction on regulating the conduct of a priest, deacon, bishop or archbishop; but that is subject to subsection (2).

The Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure 1963 (referred to in this Measure as “the EJM”) continues to confer the jurisdiction on regulating the conduct of a priest, deacon, bishop or archbishop in cases which involve a question of doctrine, ritual or ceremonial.

The standards referred to in subsection (1)(d) include, in particular, the standards required of clergy that are set out in the Ordinal or the Canons; and, in assessing whether conduct fails to meet those standards, regard may be had to guidance published by the Convocations of Canterbury and York on what is desirable in the professional conduct of clergy.

The House of Bishops may make a written declaration that the constitution, policies, objectives, activities or public statements of a political party or organisation specified in the declaration are incompatible with the Church of England’s teaching on the equality of persons or groups of different races.

Membership of, or promoting or expressing or soliciting support for, a political party or organisation specified in a declaration under subsection (3) is misconduct under subsection (1)(d).

But subsection (1)(d) does not otherwise apply to holding lawful political opinions or undertaking lawful political activities.

The reference in subsection (3) to “races” is to be read with section 9 of the Equality Act 2010.

A declaration which, immediately before the commencement of this section, was in operation under section 8(4) of the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 (referred to in this Measure as “the CDM”) continues in operation; and subsection (4) of this section accordingly applies to that declaration as if it were a declaration under subsection (3) of this section.

The office of President of Tribunals and the office of Deputy President of Tribunals each continue to be established.

The appointment to each office is made by the Appointments Committee on the recommendation of the Dean of the Arches and Auditor.

The President of Tribunals has such functions as are conferred by or under this or any other Measure.

The President is entitled to act as Chair of a bishop’s disciplinary tribunal.

The President must issue practice guidance.

If the President is unable or unwilling to act, the Deputy President of Tribunals must act instead, subject to subsection (5).

The President of Tribunals and the Deputy President may each select a person to act instead when the President or Deputy President (as the case may be) is unable or unwilling to act; but a person may be selected only if eligible for appointment as Chair of a bishop’s disciplinary tribunal.

The office of the registrar of tribunals for Canterbury and the office of the registrar of tribunals for York each continue to be established.

The registrar of tribunals for each province is appointed by the archbishop of that province after consultation with the President of Tribunals.

A person is eligible for appointment as the registrar of tribunals for a province if the person has a general qualification within the meaning given by section 71(3) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990.

The registrar of tribunals for a province may resign the office by instrument signed by the registrar and addressed to and served on the archbishop of the province.

The archbishop of a province may, after consultation with the President of Tribunals, terminate the appointment of a person as the registrar of tribunals for that province; and that power is exercisable by instrument signed by the archbishop and addressed to and served on that person.

An instrument under subsection (7) must specify the date on which the termination is to take effect; and that date must be at least twelve months after the service of the instrument.

The registrar of tribunals for each province has such functions as are conferred by the rules.

The Commission consists of no more than twelve members.

The President of Tribunals and the Deputy President of Tribunals are each members of the Commission by virtue of their office.

The other members of the Commission are appointed by the Appointments Committee.

The membership of the Commission must include at least one member of each House of the General Synod.

The Appointments Committee must appoint one of the members of the Commission as Chair.

The Commission may, subject to provision made by or under this Measure, regulate its own procedure.

The Commission must issue in the form of a Code of Practice guidance on the operation of the system provided by this Measure.

The Commission must also issue general policy guidance for the purposes of this Measure.

The Commission may amend or replace guidance issued under this section and, if it does so, must issue the guidance in its amended or replacement form.

Before issuing guidance under this section, the Commission must obtain the approval of the Dean of the Arches and Auditor and the President of Tribunals.

The Commission has such other functions as are conferred by or under this or any other Measure.

A lay person may be nominated for inclusion on a provincial panel only if the person is an actual communicant.

A nomination by a bishop under subsection (2)(b) or (c) may be made only after consultation with the bishop’s council.

Subsection (2)(d) is treated as a statutory provision for the purposes of section 50 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (which defines “judicial- appointment eligibility condition”).

Each person nominated for inclusion on a provincial panel is included for such period not exceeding six years as is specified in the nomination.

A person nominated under section 10(2)(b) or (c) or (3) is, on the expiry of the period under subsection (1) of this section, eligible to be nominated on one occasion only for such further period not exceeding six years as is specified in the nomination (and that further period need not immediately follow the preceding period).

A person nominated under section 10(2)(d) is, on the expiry of the period under subsection (1) of this section or a further period under this subsection, eligible to be nominated on any number of occasions for such further period not exceeding six years as is specified in the nomination (and none of those further periods need immediately follow the preceding period).

If the period of a person’s inclusion on a provincial panel would otherwise expire while that person remains a member of a court or tribunal which has before it a complaint under this Measure or the CDM, the person continues as a member of the court or tribunal until the complaint has been concluded.

A person nominated to fill a casual vacancy on a provincial panel is included on that provincial panel for such period not exceeding six years as is specified in the nomination.

The Clergy Conduct Commission must compile and maintain a list, known as the “panel of assessors”, of persons suitable for appointment as a case assessor under this Measure.

The panel of assessors consists of persons nominated by the Clergy Conduct Commission in such numbers as it thinks appropriate, with one or more of them being nominated as a “lead assessor” for the purposes of this Measure.

But the nomination of a person as a lead assessor may be made only on the recommendation of the Dean of the Arches and Auditor.

A lead assessor may delegate functions to another person included on the panel of assessors.

The lead assessor (or, if there is more than one, each of them acting jointly) must make an annual report on the exercise of the lead assessor’s functions during the previous year to the General Synod through the House of Bishops.

It is for the Clergy Conduct Commission to decide the terms on which a person nominated for inclusion on the panel of assessors is so included.

In deciding how many persons to nominate under subsection (2), which persons to nominate or the terms on which to include a person on the panel of assessors, the Clergy Conduct Commission must have due regard to such advice as the House of Bishops may issue on the principles to apply.

In section 86 of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and Care of Churches Measure 2018 (fees orders), in subsection (8) (meaning of “legal officer”), after paragraph (d) (but before the following “or”) insert—(da)

a person included on the panel of assessors under the Clergy Conduct Measure 2026,

Each person nominated for inclusion on the panel of assessors is included for such period not exceeding six years as is specified in the nomination.

On the expiry of the period under subsection (1), the person is eligible to be nominated for inclusion on the panel on one occasion only for such further period not exceeding six years as is specified in the nomination (and that further period need not immediately follow the preceding period).

If the period of a person’s inclusion on the panel of assessors would otherwise expire while the person is investigating a complaint, the person continues to be included on the panel until the investigation is complete.

If the period of a person’s inclusion on the panel of assessors as a lead assessor would otherwise expire while a decision by the person is pending under section 21 on what action to take on a complaint, the person continues as a lead assessor until the decision is taken.

Where a casual vacancy occurs among those included on the panel of assessors, the nomination of a person to fill the vacancy must be made by the Clergy Conduct Commission subject to the same conditions as the nomination in respect of which the vacancy has occurred.

The Chief Legal Adviser to the Archbishops’ Council and the General Synod must designate one or more members of the Legal Office of the National Church Institutions as the members of a group known as “the Investigation and Tribunals Team”.

Any function conferred by or under this Measure which is expressed to be exercisable by the Investigation and Tribunals Team has effect as a function of the Chief Legal Adviser that is exercisable through the Team.

A person may make a complaint against a priest, deacon, bishop or archbishop only if that person has a proper interest in the complaint.

Where an archdeacon has a proper interest under subsection (2)(b) to (d) in a complaint but is unable or unwilling to make the complaint, the archdeacon may nominate another archdeacon (whether from that diocese or another one); and an archdeacon so nominated has a proper interest in the complaint, by virtue of that nomination.

The “cathedral safeguarding officer”, in relation to a cathedral, is the person appointed by the Chapter of the cathedral to advise the Chapter on, or to have responsibility for managing, matters relating to the safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults.

A reference to the national safeguarding team is a reference to the staff of the National Church Institutions who assist the national director of safeguarding.

A complaint against an archbishop must be made to the President of Tribunals; and the President, having received the complaint, must notify the other archbishop.

A complaint against a chaplain of one of the armed forces of the Crown must be made to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

A complaint against a minister who has a licence to preach from an archbishop must be made to the archbishop to whom the complaint would be made under subsection (3) if the references in paragraphs (a) and (b) of that subsection to the bishop were references to the licensed minister.

A complaint against a minister who has a licence to preach from the University of Oxford or the University of Cambridge must be made to the Archbishop of Canterbury.

A complaint against a clerk in Holy Orders who holds office in a Royal Peculiar may be made in so far as the rules may provide; and for that purpose, the rules may apply provisions of this Measure with modifications.

Subsections (2) to (4) apply subject to subsections (5) to (8).

A complaint may not be made about the exercise of a function conferred by or under this Measure unless the permission of the President of Tribunals has been obtained.

In the case of a minister licensed to serve in a diocese by the bishop, the licence may not be terminated because of misconduct otherwise than as a result of a complaint being made.

The bishop or archbishop to whom a complaint is required to be made is referred to in this Measure as “the responsible bishop”.

Where a person who has a proper interest in a complaint lacks capacity to make the complaint or has a disability, the complaint may be made by a person appointed as a litigation friend for that person.

Where the person who is the respondent to a complaint lacks capacity to act as such or has a disability, a person appointed as a litigation friend for that person may act as respondent to the complaint.

Subsections (2) and (3) do not affect the powers of a person authorised under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to act for the person concerned.

It is the duty of a person appointed as a litigation friend for a person to act in that person’s best interests in relation to the complaint.

A person who is authorised by this section to make a complaint is to be treated for the purposes of section 15(1) as having a proper interest in the complaint.

A reference to having a proper interest in a complaint is a reference to having a proper interest in it by virtue of section 15(2)(g), (3)(e), (4)(d) or (5)(d).

“Parental responsibility” has the meaning given in the Children Act 1989.

A reference to lacking capacity is to be read with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

“Disability” has the meaning given in section 6 of the Equality Act 2010.

A priest, deacon, bishop or archbishop (a “cleric”) may make a complaint under this Measure against that cleric in respect of the cleric’s own conduct, except in so far as the conduct in question is already the subject of a complaint under this Measure or the CDM.

A complaint by virtue of subsection (1) against a cleric must be made to the person to whom it would be made if it were made by any other person against that cleric.

A complaint of serious misconduct may be made at any time, regardless of when the conduct alleged in the complaint occurred.

A complaint of misconduct (other than serious misconduct) or a complaint which is a grievance may be made only if the conduct alleged in the complaint, or the last instance of it in a course of conduct, occurred within the period of twelve months ending with the date on which the complaint is made.

A complaint may be made in respect of conduct occurring before the commencement of this section, subject to the limitations imposed by this section.

Subsection (2) does not apply in the case of a complaint by virtue of section 18(1) (self-referral by cleric).

If conduct alleged in the complaint would, if proved, amount to the commission of an offence, the complaint must, in so far as it relates to that alleged conduct, be referred to the police unless the alleged conduct has already been referred to the police.

Where a complaint is referred to the diocesan safeguarding officer under subsection (3)(a), that officer becomes a party to the complaint.

Where a complaint is referred to the national director of safeguarding under subsection (3)(b), either the national director or a member of the national safeguarding team nominated by the national director becomes a party to the complaint.

Where there is more than one lead assessor on the panel of assessors, the question of which of them to make the referral to under subsection (1)(a) is determined in accordance with the rules.

The rules must make provision as to the role of the diocesan safeguarding officer in the case of a complaint made by that officer or to which that officer becomes a party by virtue of subsection (4).

The rules must make provision as to the role of the national director of safeguarding or of a member of the safeguarding team nominated under subsection (5) in the case of a complaint to which the national director or nominee becomes a party by virtue of that subsection.

On referring a complaint under subsection (1)(a), the responsible bishop or the President of Tribunals must give the lead assessor such information as the rules may specify.

In the case of a complaint against an archbishop, the functions conferred on the responsible bishop by subsection (10) are exercisable by the other archbishop.

Where the lead assessor considers that a complaint is one of misconduct (but not serious misconduct) and that it could properly be dealt with as a grievance, the lead assessor may decide to allocate the complaint as a grievance under subsection (1)(a).

Before deciding whether to give permission under subsection (1)(e)(ii), the lead assessor must give the persons specified in the rules an opportunity to make written representations.

The lead assessor, having decided what action to take under subsection (1), must notify the responsible bishop or the President of Tribunals.

The rules may make provision for a case where a complaint includes more than one allegation and the lead assessor thinks that the allegations, if each made in a separate complaint, would be allocated differently under subsection (1).

The responsible bishop or the President of Tribunals, having received a notification under section 21(4), must inform each party to the complaint of the lead assessor’s decision by letter in such form as may be specified in the rules.

Where the decision is to allocate the complaint as a grievance, the responsible bishop or the President of Tribunals must appoint a person (a “designated person”) to investigate and seek to resolve the grievance (see further section  23).

A person may be appointed under subsection (2) only if the person is a clerk in Holy Orders or an actual communicant; and before making the appointment, the responsible bishop or the President of Tribunals must have due regard to the Code of Practice.

Where the decision is to allocate the complaint as one of misconduct (but not serious misconduct), the lead assessor must appoint a case assessor (see further sections 24 to 26).

Where the decision is to allocate the complaint as one of serious misconduct, the responsible bishop or the President of Tribunals must refer the complaint to the Investigation and Tribunals Team (see further section 27).

Where the decision is to allocate the complaint as one of misconduct or one of serious misconduct, the letter sent to the respondent under subsection (1) must include an explanation of the right to instruct a lawyer and the right to apply for legal aid under the Church of England (Legal Aid) Measure 1994.

In section 3 of that Measure (supplementary provisions about legal aid), after subsection (3) insert—(4)

A person is entitled to instruct a direct access barrister to act for that person in proceedings mentioned in the first column of Schedule 1.

Accordingly a reference in this Measure to the solicitor acting for a person is, in a case where the person instructs a direct access barrister, to be read as a reference to the direct access barrister.

“Direct access barrister” means a barrister who is authorised by the body responsible for regulating barristers in England and Wales to take instructions directly from a person rather than through a solicitor acting for that person.

This section applies where a complaint is allocated under section 21(1)(a) or 24(7)(b) as a grievance.

The designated person appointed under section 22(2) must, in investigating and seeking to resolve the grievance, act in accordance with the rules and have due regard to the Code of Practice.

At any time before resolving the grievance, the designated person may refer the complaint to the lead assessor with a recommendation that it be allocated instead as a complaint of misconduct or serious misconduct.

Section 21 applies to a decision to take action under subsection (4)(b) or (c) of this section as it applies to a decision to take the equivalent action under subsection (1)(b) or (c) of that section.

This section applies where a complaint is allocated under section 21(1)(b) or 23(4)(b) as a complaint of misconduct (but not serious misconduct).

The appointment of a case assessor under section 22(4) must be made from the panel of assessors.

If an issue such as may be specified in the rules arises during the investigation, the case assessor must seek advice from the Investigation and Tribunals Team.

The case assessor may, at any time during the investigation, seek advice from the Investigation and Tribunals Team on an issue relating to the complaint.

At any time before completing the investigation, the case assessor may refer the complaint to the lead assessor with a recommendation that it be allocated instead as a grievance or as a case of serious misconduct.

Sections 21 and 22 apply to a decision to take action under subsection (7)(b) or (c) of this section as they apply to a decision to take the equivalent action under subsection (1)(a) or (c) of section 21.

The report must be issued within the period specified in the rules and must address such matters as may be specified in the rules.

In so far as the recommendation made in the report is that the complaint be dismissed, the report may also recommend that the complaint be declared vexatious or totally without merit.

In the case of a complaint against a priest, deacon or bishop, the responsible bishop, having received the report and having had due regard to the Code of Practice, must implement the recommendation under subsection (3) or (5).

Neither the responsible bishop nor the President of Tribunals need implement a recommendation under subsection (4) and may accordingly decide the matters specified in paragraphs (a) and (b) of that subsection.

The parties to a complaint which has been allocated under section 21(1)(b) as a complaint of misconduct may, at any time before the complaint has been concluded, agree to refer the complaint for conciliation.

The conciliator appointed must use best endeavours to bring about a conciliation between the parties.

If, within the three months following the conciliator’s appointment, the parties agree that a conciliation has been reached, the agreement must be recorded in writing and no further steps may be taken on the complaint.

If, at the end of that three-month period, the parties have not agreed that a conciliation has been reached, the complaint proceeds as it would if it had not been referred for conciliation.

This section applies where a complaint is allocated under section 21(1)(c), 23(4)(c) or 24(7)(c) as a complaint of serious misconduct.

The Investigation and Tribunals Team may arrange for the functions under subsection (2) to be carried out on behalf of the Team by a person who is not an employee of the National Church Institutions.

The report under subsection (2)(b) must, once it has been made to the President of Tribunals, be given to each party to the complaint; and each party must be given an opportunity to make written representations on the report to the President.

If the President of Tribunals determines that there is no real prospect of a finding of misconduct, the complaint is dismissed and no further steps may be taken on it.

If the President of Tribunals determines that there is a real prospect of a finding of misconduct and that it would likely be a finding of serious misconduct but that there are circumstances as mentioned in subsection (6)(c), the complaint is dismissed and no further steps may be taken on it.

The President of Tribunals’ decision under subsection (5) and the conclusion of each consideration under subsection (6) must be recorded in writing.

The rules must make provision as to the role of the relevant safeguarding professional in the case of a complaint to which that person becomes party on an application under subsection (1)(b).

Where a complaint against a priest or deacon is referred to a bishop’s disciplinary tribunal under section 27(7)(a), it is referred to the bishop’s disciplinary tribunal for the diocese of the responsible bishop.

A person may not be appointed to a bishop’s disciplinary tribunal for the purposes of this section if that person was nominated to the provincial panel by the responsible bishop.

Where a complaint against a bishop or archbishop is referred to the Vicar-General’s court under section 27(7)(b), it is referred to the Vicar-General’s court for the province of the archbishop who is the responsible bishop.

A person may not be appointed to the Vicar-General’s court for the purposes of this section if that person was nominated to the provincial panel by the responsible bishop or, where the complaint is against an archbishop, by the other archbishop.

The standard of proof to be applied by a bishop’s disciplinary tribunal or the Vicar-General’s court in the exercise of jurisdiction under this Measure is the balance of probabilities.

A decision by the tribunal or court is to be taken by a majority of its members, except for a decision on a question of law or procedure; and a decision on a question of that description is to be taken by the Chair sitting alone.

Where the tribunal or court is to sit in public, it may exclude such persons as it decides from the whole or part of the proceedings.

The respondent to a complaint, or a bishop or archbishop or the Investigation and Tribunals Team, may apply for a restraint order against the person specified in the application.

The President of Tribunals or the Chair of the tribunal or court may make a restraint order if satisfied that the person against whom the order is sought has habitually and persistently and without reasonable grounds made complaints, applications or requests under this Measure, or under the CDM or EJM, which are vexatious or totally without merit.

Before making a restraint order, the President of Tribunals or the Chair of the tribunal or court must give the person against whom the order is sought an opportunity to make written representations.

A restraint order must be published in accordance with such directions as the President of Tribunals may issue.

A complaint, application or request made in contravention of a restraint order is a nullity.

The relevant officer may revoke a restriction order or a suspension.

The rules may provide that this section does not apply to a specified offence or an offence of a specified description.

A reference to an occurrence of a description given in subsection (1)(b) to (d) includes a reference to an occurrence of that description outside England.

A restriction order is an order to empower the relevant officer to restrict the cleric from taking specified action except in so far as the relevant officer has given permission.

The relevant officer may impose a restriction order if satisfied, having considered all the circumstances of the case, that doing so is necessary to secure the proper exercise of the functions of the office and work of a clerk in Holy Orders of the kind concerned.

A restriction order has effect for three months beginning with the date of service of the notice by virtue of subsection (4) unless the restriction order is revoked under section 34(3).

The relevant officer may, on the expiry of a restriction order, impose a further restriction order; and subsections (2) to (5) apply to each further restriction order as they applied to the immediately preceding restriction order.

A suspension is an order to suspend the cleric from carrying out any function of or incidental to the cleric’s office except in so far as the relevant officer has given permission.

Before imposing a suspension on a bishop, the relevant officer must obtain the consent of the two most senior bishops of the province concerned.

A suspension has effect for three months beginning with the date of service of the notice by virtue of subsection (5) unless the suspension is revoked under section 34(3).

The relevant officer may, on the expiry of a suspension, impose a further suspension; and subsections (2) to (6) apply to each further suspension as they applied to the immediately preceding suspension.

Where a suspension of a bishop has effect, the relevant officer may make arrangements for the ministrations of the diocese while the suspension has effect; but before doing so, the relevant officer must consult the two most senior bishops of the province concerned.

Where a suspension of an archbishop has effect, the other archbishop may make arrangements for the ministrations of the province while the suspension has effect; but before doing so, the relevant officer must consult the two most senior bishops of that province.

The cleric subject to the suspension must not interfere with the exercise of functions pursuant to arrangements made under subsections (8) to (10).

A penalty of removal from an ecclesiastical office imposed on an archbishop or bishop, or on a person holding a preferment the right to appoint to which is vested in His Majesty (and which is not a parochial benefice), does not take effect unless and until His Majesty by Order in Council confirms the penalty.

Where, on a complaint of misconduct (but not serious misconduct), the case assessor finds that the respondent has committed misconduct, the responsible bishop or, where the complaint is against an archbishop, the President of Tribunals may impose a penalty or administrative sanction.

Where, on a complaint of serious misconduct, the bishop’s disciplinary tribunal or the Vicar-General’s Court finds that the respondent has committed misconduct or serious misconduct, the tribunal or court may impose a penalty or administrative sanction.

Where, on a complaint of misconduct (but not serious misconduct), the respondent admits to misconduct, the responsible bishop or, where the complaint is against an archbishop, the President of Tribunals may impose a penalty or administrative sanction.

Where, on a complaint of serious misconduct against a priest or deacon, the respondent admits to misconduct, the bishop’s disciplinary tribunal may impose a penalty or administrative sanction.

Where, on a complaint of serious misconduct against a bishop or archbishop, the respondent admits to misconduct, the Vicar-General’s Court may impose a penalty or administrative sanction.

Where, in a case within subsections (3) to (5), the respondent admits to only part of the misconduct alleged in the complaint, no penalty or administrative sanction may be imposed for that part of the misconduct until the complaint, so far as it relates to the other part of the misconduct, has been concluded.

In a case where either or each of the administrative sanctions under section 37(2) is imposed, a penalty may not also be imposed.

Where the tribunal or court is considering the length of the period to specify in a limited prohibition under section 37(1)(g), it may take into account the amount of time for which the respondent has been suspended under section 34 pending determination of the complaint, except in so far as doing so would extinguish the period to be specified in the limited prohibition.

Before imposing a penalty, the tribunal or court may invite the responsible bishop to give a written opinion on what an appropriate penalty would be; but the invitation may not be made if the responsible bishop gave evidence in the proceedings on the complaint.

When imposing a penalty, the responsible bishop, the President of Tribunals or the tribunal or court must have due regard to the Code of Practice and to any advice given under section 9(1)(a) (advice on penalties).

On a finding or admission of misconduct on a complaint, the responsible bishop, the President of Tribunals or the tribunal or court may order the discharge of the respondent subject to the condition that the respondent does not commit misconduct during the period specified in the order; and that period must not exceed two years beginning with the date of the order.

An order under this section is called a “conditional discharge”; and the period specified in the order is referred to as the period of the discharge.

A conditional discharge may be made only if, having due regard to the circumstances (including the nature of the misconduct and the character of the respondent), the responsible bishop, the President of Tribunals or the tribunal or court is of the opinion that it is not expedient to impose a penalty or administrative sanction.

If a person in whose case a conditional discharge has been made is found to have committed or admits to having committed misconduct during the period of the discharge, the responsible bishop, the President of Tribunals or the tribunal or court dealing with that misconduct may also deal with the misconduct for which the conditional discharge was made as if a finding or admission of that misconduct had just been made.

Before making a conditional discharge, the responsible bishop, the President of Tribunals or the tribunal or court must explain to the respondent in ordinary language the effect of subsection (4).

Where, in a case within subsection (4), the conditional discharge was made for serious misconduct and the subsequent finding or admission is of misconduct that is not serious misconduct, the responsible bishop or the President of Tribunals, on receiving the case assessor’s report, must refer the matter to the bishop’s disciplinary tribunal or Vicar-General’s court for the imposition of a penalty or administrative sanction.

The responsible bishop, having considered the recommendation and the reasons for it, may depose the priest or deacon from Holy Orders.

If a person is deposed from Holy Orders, the same consequences follow as those provided for in paragraphs (1) to (3) of section 4 of the Clerical Disabilities Act 1870.

Before exercising the power under subsection (2), the responsible bishop must serve on the priest or deacon and on the registrar of the relevant province a written notice in the form specified in the rules of the intention to depose the priest or deacon.

The priest or deacon may appeal against the notice; and the appeal must be made before the end of 28 days beginning with the date of the notice.

The appeal is made to the archbishop of the province which includes the diocese of the responsible bishop.

The rules may make further provision about an appeal under subsection (5), including provision on the powers exercisable where the appeal is allowed.

The Upper House, having considered the recommendation and the reasons for it, may resolve to depose the bishop or archbishop from Holy Orders.

If the Upper House resolves to depose the bishop or archbishop from Holy Orders, the same consequences follow as those provided for in paragraphs (1) to (3) of section 4 of the Clerical Disabilities Act 1870.

But before a resolution to that effect may be put to the Upper House, a written notice in the form specified in the rules must be served on the bishop or archbishop.

The Upper House, having considered any written representations made by the bishop or archbishop before the end of 28 days beginning with the date of service of the notice, must give the bishop or archbishop an opportunity to be heard before it personally.

The rules may make further provision about representations or hearings as mentioned in subsection (6), including provision on the powers exercisable where the Upper House resolves not to depose a bishop or archbishop.

Where the penalty of limited prohibition is imposed on a priest or deacon, the bishop in whose diocese the priest or deacon holds a form of authority to exercise ministry may appoint some other person to carry out during the period of the prohibition the functions involved in exercising the ministry (without there being any need to obtain the consent of the priest or deacon on whom the limited prohibition is imposed).

Where the penalty of limited prohibition is imposed on a suffragan bishop, the bishop of the diocese concerned may appoint some other bishop to carry out the suffragan bishop’s functions during the period of the prohibition.

Where the penalty of limited prohibition is imposed on the bishop of a diocese, the archbishop of the province which includes that diocese may appoint some other bishop to carry out the diocesan bishop’s functions during the period of the prohibition.

Where the penalty of limited prohibition is imposed on an archbishop, the archbishop of the other province must carry out the archbishop’s functions during the period of the prohibition.

A breach of a penalty or censure imposed under this Measure or the CDM or EJM is to be regarded as a breach of ecclesiastical law for the purposes of section 3(1)(a) and is, accordingly, misconduct.

Sections 41(3) and 42(4) (which apply the consequences provided for in paragraphs (1) to (3) of section 4 of the Clerical Disabilities Act 1870) are subject to subsection (2) of this section.

Where a priest, deacon, bishop or archbishop (a “cleric”) is convicted of an offence (whether in England or elsewhere) or included on a barred list, a penalty or administrative sanction may be imposed on the cleric without the need for a complaint to be made.

The rules may make provision for a case where the power under this section is exercisable by the President of Tribunals.

When exercising the power under this section, a person must have due regard to the Code of Practice and to any advice given under section 9(1)(a) (penalties etc).

The relevant registrar must attend on the bishop or archbishop for the exercise of the power; and the decision on the penalty or administrative sanction to impose must be recorded in writing, with a copy being sent to each of the persons specified in the rules.

Where a penalty is imposed in exercise of the power under this section, the penalty has effect as if it had been imposed by a tribunal or court on a complaint; and sections 38 to 45 apply accordingly but with the requirement for a recommendation in sections 41 and 42 being ignored.

The rules may provide that this section does not apply to a specified offence or an offence of a specified description.

But the President of Tribunals may on application extend that period if, after giving the cleric in question an opportunity to make representations and taking any representations into account, the President is satisfied that the applicant for the extension did not know of the conviction or inclusion.

This section applies where the President of Tribunals is satisfied that a priest, deacon, bishop or archbishop (a “cleric”) who holds a form of authority to exercise ministry in either province is subject to a finding made within a Church other than the Church of England which would, if it were made under this Measure, amount to a finding of misconduct.

This section also applies where the President of Tribunals is satisfied that a cleric who holds a form of authority to exercise ministry in either province is subject to a finding made within the Church of England in a territory where this Measure does not apply which would, if it were made under this Measure, amount to a finding of misconduct.

The President must record in writing the decision taken under subsection (3).

On a referral under subsection (3)(b), the tribunal or court may impose a penalty or administrative sanction.

A reference to being subject to a finding which would, if made under this Measure, amount to a finding of misconduct includes a reference to making an admission which would, if made under this Measure, amount to an admission of misconduct.

Where a benefice becomes vacant as a result of this Measure, the vacancy is taken to begin with the start date specified in the notice under section 7(4) of the Patronage (Benefices) Measure 1986 (and not when the person concerned ceases to hold office under this Measure).

Where a suspension or a penalty of limited prohibition is imposed on a clerk in Holy Orders who is a member of a board of trustees which is the patron of a benefice, the clerk is not, for the period of the suspension or limited prohibition, entitled to participate in the exercise of functions by the board of trustees in its capacity as patron.

A reference in subsection (2) to being the patron of a benefice includes, in the case of a diocesan bishop or archbishop, a reference to being entitled to exercise the right of presentation to a benefice under section 16 of the Patronage (Benefices) Measure 1986.

Where a decision is taken under section 21 or 24 to allocate a complaint as a grievance, the complainant may request the President of Tribunals to review the decision.

Where a complaint against a priest, deacon or bishop is dismissed under section 22(8)(a), the complainant may request the President of Tribunals to review the decision to dismiss it.

A party to a complaint, other than a complaint against an archbishop, may request the President of Tribunals to review a finding of fact in a report under section 25 or the recommendations made in the report.

A person, other than an archbishop, on whom a restriction order or suspension is imposed under section 34 may appeal to the President of Tribunals.

Where the relevant officer decides not to impose a restriction order, or not to impose a suspension, on a person other than an archbishop under section 34 but the diocesan safeguarding officer or the national director of safeguarding thinks that the person presents a significant risk of harm, the officer or director may request the President of Tribunals to review the decision.

Where the responsible bishop imposes a penalty, the priest, deacon or bishop on whom it is imposed may request the President of Tribunals to review the penalty.

The reference in subsection (6) to presenting a significant risk of harm is to be read with section 34(5).

A priest, deacon or bishop on whom a penalty has been imposed in exercise of the power under section 46 may apply to the President of Tribunals for a review of the penalty.

An archbishop on whom a penalty has been imposed in exercise of the power under section 46 may apply to the Dean of the Arches and Auditor for a review of the penalty.

Where a priest, deacon or bishop applies for a review of a penalty imposed by the responsible bishop, the implementation of the penalty may be postponed only if the President of Tribunals so orders.

The respondent to a complaint may appeal against a penalty imposed by the bishop’s disciplinary tribunal or the Vicar-General’s court.

The respondent to a complaint may appeal on a question of law or fact against a finding of the bishop’s disciplinary tribunal or the Vicar-General’s court.

The Investigation and Tribunals Team may appeal on a question of law against a finding of the bishop’s disciplinary tribunal or the Vicar-General’s court.

The Investigation and Tribunals Team may, if it appears to the Team that the penalty imposed on a respondent to a complaint is unduly lenient, apply for a review of the penalty.

An appeal or application for review under this section must be made to the Arches Court of Canterbury or the Chancery Court of York (depending on the province in which the penalty was imposed or the finding was made).

Where a tribunal or court grants an application for permission under this section, it may direct that the issues to be heard on the appeal or review are to be limited in the way specified.

If the Dean of the Arches and Auditor is unable or unwilling to sit as Chair under subsection (1) or (2), the Dean must appoint a person to sit as Chair instead; and a person may be appointed under this subsection only if the person is included on a provincial panel under section 10(2)(a) or (d).

A person may not be appointed to the Arches Court of Canterbury or the Chancery Court of York for the purposes of this section if that person was nominated for inclusion on the provincial panel by the responsible bishop.

In a case within subsection (1)(d), the information required to be provided under subsection (2) also includes the reason for being included in the barred list.

The rules may provide that this section does not apply to a specified offence or an offence of a specified description.

A reference to an occurrence of a description given in subsection (1)(a) to (d) includes a reference to an occurrence of that description outside England.

Section 16(10) (permission of President of Tribunals required for complaint about function under this Measure) does not apply to a requirement under subsection (2).

Section 16(10) (permission of President of Tribunals required for complaint about function conferred under this Measure) does not apply to a requirement under subsection (1).

A reference to a finding against a clerk in Holy Orders includes a reference to an admission by the clerk.

“Work” includes voluntary work.

The rules must make provision as to informing a clerk in Holy Orders included on the list of the particulars recorded on the list in the case of that clerk.

A clerk in Holy Orders who is included on the list may, in accordance with the rules, appeal to the President of Tribunals against the particulars recorded on the list in respect of that clerk but not, subject to subsection (4), against the fact of inclusion itself.

A clerk in Holy Orders who is included on the list may, in accordance with the rules, appeal to the President of Tribunals against the fact of inclusion on the list but only on the grounds that the clerk’s name was included on the list in error.

On an appeal under subsection (3), the President may, in accordance with the rules, direct that the particulars recorded on the list in respect of the appellant are to be altered in the manner specified in the direction.

On an appeal under subsection (4), the President may, in accordance with the rules, direct that the clerk’s name is to be removed from the list.

The rules must make provision for a case where a conviction on which a clerk’s inclusion on the list is based becomes protected by virtue of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.

The list that was being maintained under section 38 of the CDM immediately before the commencement of this section (“the CDM list”) may be used for the purpose of carrying out the duty under subsection (1).

Accordingly, a reference to a person included, or particulars recorded, on the list under this section includes a reference to a person included, or particulars recorded, on the CDM list.

The judge or Chair of the court or tribunal may send the High Court a signed certificate stating the act or omission.

The Church Commissioners may pay out of their general fund the whole or part of the costs incurred by a bishop or archbishop under this Measure, in so far as the Commissioners are satisfied that the costs are reasonable.

Subsection (1) does not apply to costs incurred in the capacity as a party to a complaint or as a person on whom a penalty or other order under this Measure has been imposed.

The Archbishops’ Council must pay the costs of a tribunal or court in the exercise of jurisdiction under this Measure.

The Church Commissioners may pay sums out of their general fund towards the liability of the Archbishops’ Council under subsection (3), in so far as the Commissioners are satisfied that the costs are reasonable.

The fees of an ecclesiastical judge or legal officer for carrying out functions under this Measure are determined in accordance with section 86 of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and Care of Churches Measure 2018 (fees orders); and “ecclesiastical judge” and “legal officer” each have the meaning given in that section.

A judgment, order or other decision under this Measure that is specified in the rules must be published in the specified form and manner.

The bishop of a diocese may by instrument signed by that bishop delegate to a suffragan or assistant bishop of that or another diocese, or to the bishop of another diocese, such functions exercisable for the purposes of this Measure as are specified in the instrument.

Either archbishop may by instrument signed by that archbishop delegate to the other archbishop, or to a diocesan, suffragan or assistant bishop, such functions exercisable for the purposes of this Measure as are specified in the instrument.

The delegator may vary or revoke an instrument under this section by a subsequent instrument under this section.

Having made an instrument under this section, the delegator must send a copy of it to the President of Tribunals, the Clergy Conduct Commission and the registrar of the diocese or province (as the case may be); and the registrar must file the copy in the registry.

Where the exercise of a function delegated under this section requires the application of the delegator’s episcopal seal to a document, the document is to be issued as if it were a deed and executed by the person authorised to do so by the instrument under this section.

A statement in a document issued in the exercise of a function delegated under this section that the person signing or executing the document is authorised by an instrument under this section to exercise the function is conclusive evidence of that fact.

An instrument under this section does not operate so as to remove any function from the delegator.

A declaration by the House of Bishops under section 3(3) is made on being voted for by at least two-thirds of the members of the House present at a duly convened meeting.

If at least 25 members of the General Synod give notice under its Standing Orders that they wish the declaration to be debated, it comes into operation on the date on which it is approved by the Synod.

But if the declaration is not debated, it comes into operation at the end of the period required by the Standing Orders of the General Synod for giving notice as mentioned in subsection (3).

The declaration may be revoked by a resolution of the House of Bishops; and subsections (1) to (4) apply to a revocation as they apply to the declaration.

The first Code of Practice may not be issued unless a draft has been laid before, and approved by, the General Synod.

A revised version of the Code of Practice must be laid before the General Synod as soon as practicable after it is issued.

If the General Synod resolves on a motion under subsection (3)(b) that the revised version is to be revoked, the revised version is revoked on the passing of the resolution; but that does not affect the validity of anything previously done in reliance on, or in having due regard to, the revised version.

A reference in this section to a revised version of the Code of Practice is a reference to an amended version or replacement of the guidance contained in the Code; but subsections (2) to (4) do not apply in the case of amendments which the Clergy Conduct Commission considers insubstantial.

A reference in this Measure to the national director of safeguarding or to the national safeguarding team is to be read with section 15(9) and (10).

In its application to the diocese of Leeds, this Measure has effect as if a reference to the cathedral of a diocese were a reference to any of the cathedrals of that diocese.

Accordingly, an extra-diocesan place is to be treated as being in the province which includes the diocese in which, by virtue of subsection (6), it is situated.

The seniority of bishops is determined for the purposes of this Measure by reference to the length of time that each of them has held office as a diocesan bishop in either province without interruption; and, for the purposes of that determination, the archbishops and the responsible bishop are excluded.

A reference in this Measure to a meeting includes (in so far as it does not already) a reference to a meeting which persons may attend, speak at or vote in, or otherwise participate in without any, or without all, of the persons being together in the same place.

A reference in this Measure to a place where a meeting is held, or is to be held, includes (in so far as it does not already) a reference to more than one place, including electronic, digital or virtual locations, web addresses or conference call telephone numbers.

A person is to be regarded for the purposes of this Measure (in so far as the person would not be already) as being present at or attending a meeting at any given time if the person is at that time able to hear and be heard by, and where practicable to see and be seen by, the other persons present.

A reference in this Measure to being present at or attending a meeting includes (in so far as it does not already) a reference to being present or attending by electronic means, including by telephone conference, video conference, live webcast or live interactive streaming.

For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), if the decision being appealed is varied on appeal, the proceedings or conviction are conclusive only as varied; and in so far as the decision is reversed, it ceases to have effect.

After the conviction of a clerk in Holy Orders for an offence becomes conclusive, a certificate of the conviction is conclusive proof for the purposes of this Measure that the clerk committed the conduct constituting the offence.

Where a clerk in Holy Orders is given a simple or conditional caution, the caution form is conclusive proof for the purposes of this Measure that the clerk committed the conduct for which the caution was given.

Where a clerk in Holy Orders is given an administrative disposal, the record kept by the police of the clerk being given that disposal is conclusive proof for the purposes of this Measure that the clerk committed the conduct for which the disposal was given.

Schedule 1 (consequential amendments) has effect.

An amendment made by that Schedule to regulations does not affect the power to make further regulations amending or revoking the provision made by the amendment.

The CDM is repealed.

This Measure may be cited as the Clergy Conduct Measure 2026.

This section comes into force on the day on which this Measure is passed.

The other provisions of this Measure come into force on such day as the Archbishops of Canterbury and York may by order jointly appoint; and different days may be appointed for different purposes.

The Archbishops of Canterbury and York may by order jointly make transitional, transitory or saving provision in connection with the commencement of a provision of this Measure.

Transitory provision under subsection (4) may, in particular, modify the application of a provision of this Measure pending the commencement of a provision of another Measure or a provision of an Act of Parliament.

The power to make an order under subsection (3) or (4) is exercisable by statutory instrument; and the Statutory Instruments Act 1946 applies as if the order had been made by a Minister of the Crown and as if this Measure were an Act of Parliament.

This Measure may be applied to the Channel Islands or either of them, with or without modifications, under any procedure for doing so which has effect in the Islands or (as the case may be) the Island in question; and for this purpose, the references to the Channel Islands or either of them have the same meaning as references to the Bailiwicks or either of them have in the Channel Islands Measure 2020.

If an Act of Tynwald or an instrument made under an Act of Tynwald so provides, this Measure extends to the Isle of Man subject to such exceptions, adaptations or modifications as are specified in the Act or instrument.