Wimbledon's Expansion Plans Hit a Snag Over a 150-Year-Old Law
A century-old legal stipulation could hinder the All England Club's ambitious plans to expand Wimbledon's tennis grounds. The club is locked in a legal battle with the campaign group Save Wimbledon Park (SWP) over their proposal to nearly triple the site's size, adding 38 new courts and an 8,000-seat stadium.
The crux of the matter lies in a statutory trust established under the Public Health Act of 1875, which restricts the land's use to public walks or pleasure grounds. SWP argues that this trust remained intact even when the land changed hands in the 1960s and when the All England Club acquired the freehold in 1993.
However, the club's legal team disputes this, asserting that the land was never subject to such a trust and that, even if it were, it would have been dissolved upon the 1993 purchase. The club acknowledges that, if the trust existed, it would significantly impact their development plans.
Jonathan Karas KC, representing the All England Club, emphasized the anomaly of the land being held under a statutory trust, which would constitute a substantial change in its status. He highlighted that the golf course land has always been treated as private property leased to a private club, a fact upon which the sale to the club was based.
Karas further argued that the golf course was never intended for public access or recreation, unlike Wimbledon Park, which was placed under a statutory trust in 1927 by the Wimbledon Corporation. The golf course remained leased to the golf club throughout this period, Karas claimed, and was not part of the public trust.
This position was maintained when the land was transferred to the London Borough of Merton in the 1960s and when the All England Club purchased the freehold for approximately £5 million in 1993, according to Karas. Documents from that era confirmed the borough's freedom to dispose of the land as it saw fit and that the golf course was not subject to a statutory trust.
Sasha White KC, representing SWP, countered that the trust prevented the plans from restricting the golf course land's use, ensuring the public's appreciation of its openness. Caroline Shea KC, also for SWP, argued that the golf course remains an open space and that the club's stance is flawed, as the evidence doesn't support differential treatment between the park's elements.
Despite the expansion plans receiving approval from the Greater London Authority in 2024, they have faced ongoing scrutiny from campaigners. This is the second legal challenge brought by SWP, following their loss in a High Court case against the GLA's planning permission decision last July. The hearing is set to conclude on January 23rd.
