Plans to expand Wimbledon can go ahead, judge rules

Plans to virtually triple the scale of the Wimbledon tennis website are set to proceed after a marketing campaign group’s authorized problem towards the choice to grant planning permission was dismissed by a Excessive Court docket choose.

The proposal which had been accredited by the Better London Authority (GLA) contains thirty-eight new tennis courts and an 8-thousand seat stadium.

Save Wimbledon Park (SWP) had argued in court docket the event on the previous Wimbledon Park Golf Membership in west London was illegal because the proposed land was protected.

Deborah Jevans, chairwoman of the All England Membership, mentioned she was “delighted” with the choice whereas the SWP indicated it could problem the ruling.

Barristers for SWP advised the Excessive Court docket earlier this month that the choice to approve the plans was “irrational” and needs to be quashed, as Wimbledon Park – a Grade II*-listed heritage website partly designed by Lancelot “Functionality” Brown – was coated by restrictions on the way it may very well be used.

The GLA and the All England Membership defended the problem, with the court docket advised that the choice was a “planning judgment correctly exercised” and that the restrictions weren’t “materials”.

Dismissing the problem, Mr Justice Saini mentioned: “Briefly, the defendant’s determination on the relevance of deliverability, making use of to each the statutory belief and the restrictive covenants, was a planning judgment rationally exercised and having regard to acceptable and related components.”

The proposals would see seven upkeep buildings, entry factors, and an space of parkland with permissive public entry constructed, along with the courts and related infrastructure.

It will additionally enable the membership to host Wimbledon qualifiers on website.

Following the ruling on Monday, SWP mentioned it has been “suggested that it ought to” search to problem the choice, and that it believed the GLA “did make a major authorized error in the way in which it handled the particular authorized standing of the park”.

After Merton Council accredited the plans, however Wandsworth Council rejected them, Metropolis Corridor took cost of the applying.

Sir Sadiq Khan recused himself from the method after beforehand expressing public help for the event and planning permission for the scheme was granted by Jules Pipe, London’s deputy mayor for planning.

He mentioned that the proposals “would facilitate very important advantages” which “clearly outweigh the hurt”.

Ms Jevans mentioned on the time that the proposals would ship 27 acres (11 hectares) of “newly accessible parkland for the group”.

In written submissions, Sasha White KC mentioned that the All England Membership acquired the freehold for the golf course in 1993 and the leasehold in 2021.

The barrister advised the two-day listening to that the land was topic to a “statutory belief requiring it to be stored obtainable for public recreation use” and that when the freehold was acquired, the membership entered into “restrictive covenants” governing its use.

He mentioned this meant any plans couldn’t “prohibit its use in order to not impair the appreciation of most of the people of the extent or openness of the golf course land”.

He continued that separate Excessive Court docket proceedings had been ongoing over whether or not a statutory belief existed, and that if it does, the All England Membership has “accepted” that that is “incompatible with the event of the proposal”.

A listening to in that case is because of happen in January 2026.

In court docket, he mentioned: “You might not have a extra protected piece of land throughout the planning system, frankly.”

Mark Westmoreland Smith KC, for the GLA, mentioned in written submissions that Mr Pipe obtained “detailed recommendation” over the “relevance” of the “alleged” belief and covenants, and made his determination on the belief that they existed.

The barrister mentioned that the choice was a “planning judgment correctly exercised and having regard to the suitable and related components”.

He mentioned that planning officers “suggested that the alleged impediment” that the restrictions would current “was not itself a fabric consideration”.

In his written arguments, Russell Harris KC, for the All England Membership, mentioned that planning officers “acknowledged and had regard to” the belief and covenants.

In his 31-page ruling, Mr Justice Saini mentioned that the authority “correctly thought-about the implications of the event on public open house”.

Christopher Coombe, director of SWP, mentioned following the judgment: “This judgment would, if it stands, set a worrying precedent for the undesirable improvement of protected inexperienced belt and public open areas round London and throughout the nation.”

Sir Sadiq mentioned the ruling was “welcome information” that may “cement Wimbledon’s fame as the best tennis competitors on this planet”.

Ms Jevans mentioned: “It’s clear that we’ve a sturdy planning permission that allows us to create a everlasting house for the Wimbledon qualifying competitors in addition to delivering 27 acres of gorgeous new parkland for native individuals, offering public entry to land that has been a personal golf course for over 100 years.”