Wimbledon expansion plans face 150-year legal challenge

A 150-year-old law could restrict how land used to expand Wimbledon’s tennis courts can be used, the High Court has heard.

The All England Club is in legal action with the Save Wimbledon Park campaign (SWP) over plans to nearly triple the size of the original Wimbledon Park Golf Club grounds.

The proposals include 38 new tennis courts and an 8,000-seat stadium, allowing the club to host Wimbledon qualifiers on site.

The SWP argued that the land was governed by a statutory trust under the Public Health Act 1875, meaning it was only “used for public walks or pleasure grounds”.

The group claims the trust still existed when the land changed hands in the 1960s and when the All England Club purchased the freehold in 1993.

Lawyers for the All England Club dispute this, insisting the land was never held in such a trust – and even if it was, it did not survive the 1993 purchase.

However, the club admitted that if the trust existed it would interfere with its development plans.

In written submissions, Jonathan Karas KC, representing the All England Club, said it would be “unusual” if the land was found to be held on a statutory trust and that the discovery would mark a “substantial change in the condition of the land”.

He said: “In practice, golf course land has always been treated as private land leased to private clubs. It is sold to [the All England Club] On this basis.

“It was never planned as a park and the public is not allowed access to it for public recreation purposes.”

Public Wimbledon Park was created in 1927 by Wimbledon Corporation and is a statutory trust.

Karas argued that during this period the golf course had been leased to the golf club and therefore was not part of the public trust.

He said this position remained in place when the land was handed over to the London Borough of Merton in the 1960s and when the All England Club purchased the freehold for approximately £5 million in 1993.

Documents from the time “repeatedly claimed that the London borough of Merton was free to dispose [the land] Karas said it was “just as it was intended to be” and that the golf course “did not bear the burden of a statutory trust.”

In earlier proceedings, SWP’s Sasha White KC argued that the trust meant the land plan could not “restrict its use so as not to impair public perception of the extent or openness of the golf course land”.

In written submissions to Friday’s hearing, Caroline Shea KC, representing the SWP, said the golf course “remains an open space” and the club’s position was “flawed”.

“The evidence does not support the differential treatment between the two parts of the park that would be required to draw the inference that the golf course land is not occupied,” she said. [as public land] The park is.

“Most importantly, all it does is show that different groups engage in different recreational activities in different areas of the park.”

The expansion plan was approved by the Greater London Authority in 2024 but faces ongoing scrutiny from campaigners.

This is the second legal challenge brought by the SWP after losing in the High Court against the GLA’s decision to grant planning permission in July last year.

The hearing is scheduled to end on January 23.