Campaigners set to challenge Wimbledon’s ‘unlawful’ expansion plan at the High Court
A campaign group fighting against ‘unlawful’ plans to expand the Wimbledon tennis grounds will take its case to the High Court next week.
The Save Wimbledon Park group (SWP), which crowdfunded the judicial review through 1,100 separate donations, argues that the Greater London Authority (GLA) ‘made errors of law and planning policy’ by granting permission to extend the championship grounds to include an 8,000-seat stadium and 38 new championship sized courts on Wimbledon Park.
The campaigners believe the development plans submitted by the All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC) on the Grade II* listed heritage site which straddles the boroughs of Wandsworth and Merton would set a ‘dangerous precedent’ for further private commercial developments, given that the park is amongst the most legally protected land in the country.
It would also mean that even formal legal obligations not to build entered by developers when acquiring land from public authorities and accompanying public undertakings could not be relied upon.
Wimbledon Park, a historic Capability Brown landscape, was purchased in 1915 under a special act of parliament using local ratepayers’ funds to serve as a public park and prevent development. Part of it was later leased to a local golf club. Beginning in 1993, the AELTC acquired the golf course land from the London Borough of Merton, giving binding covenants not to develop. Years later, the AELTC paid £65 million to the golf club to surrender the final 20 years of its lease—paving the way for a development proposal.
The park is subject to similar development protection as the green belt or royal parks. The group believes the future of over 50 parks and green spaces under threat of development in London - according to a report by countryside charity CPRE - could be affected by this judgment.
The two-day legal challenge on July 8-9, which falls during the Wimbledon fortnight, will determine if the GLA’s decision was unlawful because it ‘failed to take into account the implications of the statutory public recreation trust and restrictive covenants’ of the land, which would make the proposed development impossible.
At least 50 campaigners, including comedian, writer and SWP advocate Andy Hamilton, will gather outside the court to protest the development.
The Have I Got News for You regular said, “It’s really a very simple story. A rich private tennis club is looking to make itself even richer by tripling in size, at devastating cost to the local environment and community.”
The planning scheme, which could see the existing site triple in size from 41 to 115 hectares, was escalated to the Mayor of London, following its rejection by Wandsworth Council. Merton Council agreed to the development, which was subsequently approved by the GLA in September 2024.
This is the first key stage in the David vs Goliath battle, which has engulfed the Southwest London suburb for over four years. Campaigners fear it will wreak havoc on the local community and have a detrimental impact on the local environment and delicate ecosystem.
Despite multiple attempts to engage with AELTC through official channels and public meetings, SWP says their concerns have fallen on deaf ears, and broken promises made by AELTC and Merton Council not to build on the land have forced the matter to the High Court.
The court will also consider, alongside the trust and covenants matter, whether deliberate neglect of the registered park and garden, a heritage asset, should have been taken into account when making the planning decision and whether the proposed private tennis development fails to offer an ‘alternative sports and recreational’ space for public use.
If the ruling finds in favour of one of the three legal points, the planning application will be sent back for reconsideration on the correct basis.
Jules Pipe, the deputy mayor of London for planning, regeneration and skills, who green-lighted the project, said the ‘very significant benefits’ of the scheme outweighed any potential environmental damage. Something campaigners fiercely refute.
The current plans estimate that 300 trees will be felled to make way for the expansion. Initial plans included the felling of mature trees, which have since been amended under pressure following an AELTC pledge to protect over 40 mature trees and plant 1,500 new trees.
The true loss of natural life, SWP argues, will be closer to 2,000 trees across 54 species, as AELTC’s tree survey failed to account for all trees within the development area. This will significantly impact multiple species, including birds, bats, badgers, and hedgehogs.
Any environmental benefits of planting new trees are unlikely to be felt until 2060.
Further environmental destruction will come from the 40,400 lorry journeys that SWP estimates will pass through the construction route within the proximity of over 30 primary schools and nurseries.
Over the proposed eight years of construction, at worst, this equated to 54 trips per day, one passing every ten minutes, severely impacting the air quality.
AELTC argues it is a necessary development to enable all qualifying matches to be held on the site, to align with the other three Grand Slams held in Australia, France, and the US but SWP say there is little evidence that either the prestige or the commercial success of the tournament is really at risk.
Christopher Coombe, a director of SWP, said: “If this decision by the GLA is upheld and the development goes ahead, the detrimental impacts on our environment and delicate ecosystem will be devastating. Our community has given massive support to the campaign over four years, desperate to stop the loss of open space intended for public recreation.
“This is not just in SW19; it’s happening all over London. Once built, it is gone forever, and there is very little local trust in an organisation that prides itself on fair play, but then breaks its word.
“We all love the Wimbledon championships but don’t believe the proposal is really about protecting the future of the world’s best tennis tournament. We will continue to press AELTC to reconsider their fighting stance towards our community and to join us in finding a resolution that we can all get behind.”
John Gould, partner at Russell-Cooke, is representing SWP. He said:
For such an important and irreversible decision, the greatest care is necessary to ensure that it is taken in accordance with the law and planning policy. If the court decides that the decision was unlawful, it will send the application back to be considered properly. In addition to the planning dispute, there are two other substantial legal issues namely whether the development is contrary to the specific statutory provisions relating to the Park and, secondly, the inconsistency between the proposal and the restrictive covenants binding the land.
Get in touch
If you would like to speak with a member of the team you can contact our regulation and public law solicitors by telephone on +44 (0)20 3826 7524 or complete our enquiry form.
