Wimbledon expansion plan faces dispute over 150-year-old law

A 150‑yr‑previous legislation could prohibit how land earmarked for the growth of the Wimbledon tennis website can be utilized, the Excessive Court docket has heard.

The All England Membership is in a authorized battle with marketing campaign group Save Wimbledon Park (SWP) over plans to nearly triple the scale of its grounds on the previous Wimbledon Park Golf Membership website.

The proposals embody 38 new tennis courts and an 8,000‑seat stadium, permitting the membership to host Wimbledon qualifiers on website.

SWP argues that the land is topic to a statutory belief below the Public Well being Act 1875, that means it is just “for the aim of getting used as public walks or pleasure grounds”.

The group claims the belief remained in place when the land modified palms within the Sixties and once more when the All England Membership bought the freehold in 1993.

Barristers for the All England Membership dispute this, insisting the land was by no means topic to such a belief – and even when it was, it didn’t survive the 1993 buy.

Nevertheless, the membership accepts that if a belief existed, it might intervene with its growth plans.

In written submissions, Jonathan Karas KC, representing the All England Membership, stated it might be “anomalous” if the land have been discovered to be held below a statutory belief and that such a discovering would mark “a substantive change within the standing of the land”.

He stated: “The golf course land has always been handled in follow as non-public land let to a personal membership. It was offered to [the All England Club] on that foundation.

“It has by no means been laid out as a public park, nor have the general public been permitted to entry it for the needs of public recreation.”

Public Wimbledon Park, which was positioned below a statutory belief, was created in 1927 by the Wimbledon Company.

Karas argued that the golf course remained leased to the golf membership all through this era, and subsequently was not a part of the general public belief.

He stated this place continued when the land handed to the London Borough of Merton within the Sixties, and when the All England Membership purchased the freehold for round £5m in 1993.

Paperwork from the time “repeatedly asserted that the London Borough of Merton was free to eliminate [the land] because it wished”, and that the golf course “was not burdened with a statutory belief”, in keeping with Karas.

In earlier proceedings, Sasha White KC, for SWP, argued that the belief meant plans for the land 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”.

In written submissions for Friday’s listening to, Caroline Shea KC, additionally representing SWP, stated the golf course “stays an open house” and that the membership’s place was “flawed”.

She stated: “The proof doesn’t help the form of differential remedy between the 2 components of the park that may be required to lift an inference that the golf course land was not appropriated [as public land] and the park was.

“At its highest, all it does is present that completely different leisure actions have been undertaken by completely different teams over completely different areas of the park.”

The growth plans have been accredited by the Better London Authority in 2024 however have confronted sustained scrutiny from campaigners.

That is the second authorized problem introduced by SWP, after the group misplaced a Excessive Court docket case towards the GLA’s choice to grant planning permission in July final yr.

The listening to is ready to complete on 23 January.