Court of Appeal Considers Wimbledon Tennis Plans

---

Campaigners say AELTC 'intransigence' has galvanised local opposition

Save Wimbledon Park members gather outside the Royal Courts of Justice

Campaigners challenging plans to expand Wimbledon’s tennis grounds say the All England Lawn Tennis Club’s refusal to compromise has “galvanised” local opposition, as their long-running legal battle reached the Court of Appeal.

Save Wimbledon Park (SWP) is challenging the Mayor of London’s approval of plans for an 8,000-seat stadium and 38 tennis courts on the former Wimbledon Park Golf Course next to their main site.

All England Lawn Tennis Club (AELTC), which is defending the approval alongside the Greater London Authority (GLA), said it was frustrated by the five-year planning process but hoped to start work on the expansion before 2030.

SWP members gathered in the rain outside the Royal Courts of Justice on Wednesday (7 October ) before filing into an overspill courtroom to follow the first day of the two-day hearing. However, Christopher Coombe, Director of the SWP campaign, told the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS) that his fellow campaigners were “really upset about the whole process”.

“AELTC’s intransigence and inability to speak to us has galvanised us,” he told the LDRS, noting that 500 people attended their most recent public meeting.

He claimed AELTC had failed to compromise with SWP throughout the planning process, adding that its chair recently attended one of their public meetings but “stayed only for an hour and said nothing”.

Mr Coombe said the group had offered the AELTC an alternative proposal that would avoid building on the former golf course land, but the club rejected it. “They have ignored every effort to discuss and compromise,” he said.

Christopher Coombe is the Director is Save Wimbledon Park

However, AELTC’s Head of the Chair’s Office, Dominic Foster, told the LDRS that claims the club had refused to engage were “not correct”. He said AELTC had held a number of meetings with campaigners, but that they remained opposed to the expansion plans.

“They are not prepared to accept that, that’s fine,” he added. “We are where we are, but we know the vast majority of people want this to happen.”

CGI of the aerial view of the completed scheme. Picture: AELTC

The proposed development includes an 8,000-seat covered stadium, 38 tennis courts and facilities for players, guests and events across the 39-hectare site, which spans Merton and Wandsworth. Stretching from Wimbledon Village to Southfields, the site is equivalent in size to around 50 football pitches and includes Wimbledon Park Lake and land around Church Road.

AELTC wants to move its Championships qualifying event, currently held in Roehampton, to the former golf course site. Throughout the planning process, the club has said the expansion is needed to ensure Wimbledon can keep pace with the capacity of the other global Grand Slam tournaments.

Opponents of the plan demonstrate outside an earlier hearing at City Hall. Picture: Save Wimbledon Park

Merton Council approved the plans in October 2023, while Wandsworth Council rejected them the following month. The Mayor of London then called in the application in January 2024, before the Deputy Mayor for Planning granted permission in September 2024.

The two-day hearing follows the High Court’s dismissal of SWP’s first appeal in July 2025. The judge ruled planners did not need to consider legal protections on the land because the scheme’s benefits were not “time-sensitive”.

SWP is now challenging that decision, arguing the Mayor failed to consider a statutory trust and restrictive covenants attached to the land, which it says prevent development and require the site to remain available for public use.

The protections date back to the local authority’s ownership of Wimbledon Park and the 1993 sale of the golf course to AELTC. SWP believes the land remains subject to a statutory trust requiring it to be kept available for public recreation.

SWP also argues the land is subject to a statutory trust under the Public Health Act 1875, requiring it to be kept available for public recreational use in perpetuity.

During the hearing, SWP’s barrister Sasha White KC described the statutory trust as a “showstopper”, arguing that planning law prevents development unless very special circumstances are met.

The site is currently subject to 11 separate designations, including Metropolitan Open Land, Open Space and Registered Park and Garden of Special Historic Interest. It also falls within a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation and a defined Green Corridor.

“It is difficult to imagine a piece of land subject to more difficult designations,” Mr White KC told the court.

He also argued that the GLA could not rely on an urgent need for additional sporting facilities for the Championships to justify developing protected Metropolitan Open Land while ignoring whether the scheme could legally be built.

However, AELTC’s case, led by Russell Harris KC, argued that the GLA was right to focus on the planning merits of the expansion rather than the trusts and covenants. He also disputed SWP’s interpretation of the trusts and covenants, and said the expansion would unlock sporting benefits, new public parkland and a de-silted lake on the site.

AELTC and GLA have previously said Wimbledon Park Golf Club, which occupied part of the application site, only provided permissive access to the land. However, Mr Coombe disputed this, saying Merton residents could access the site and that it would have returned to open space when the golf club’s lease ended.

The current appeal and subsequent decision are not expected to be SWP’s final legal challenge. A further hearing on the trusts is due next summer, meaning the dispute could continue until at least 2028.

Asked whether the delays to the plans were a source of frustration for AELTC, Mr Foster said: “Yes, of course.”

He added: “We would have loved to have delivered 27 acres of new parkland to the public by now, which we are unable to do while we are still going through this process.”

Despite this, he said AELTC remained confident that work would start on the expansion by 2030.

Meanwhile, Mr Coombe said SWP remained committed to the legal challenge. Asked by the LDRS about the group’s chances at appeal, the former lawyer said: “You can always flip a coin when you go to court, but we are as confident as we can be.”

Harrison Gallivan - Local Democracy Reporter

Like Reading Articles Like This? Help Us Produce More This site remains committed to providing local community news and public interest journalism. Articles such as the one above are integral to what we do. We aim to feature as much as possible on local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents, community-based initiatives and even helping people find missing pets. We’ve always done that and won’t be changing, in fact we’d like to do more. However, the readership that these stories generates is often below that needed to cover the cost of producing them. Our financial resources are limited and the local media environment is intensely competitive so there is a constraint on what we can do. We are therefore asking our readers to consider offering financial support to these efforts. Any money given will help support community and public interest news and the expansion of our coverage in this area. A suggested monthly payment is £8 but we would be grateful for any amount for instance if you think this site offers the equivalent value of a subscription to a daily printed newspaper you may wish to consider £20 per month. If neither of these amounts is suitable for you then contact info@neighbournet.com and we can set up an alternative. All payments are made through a secure web site. One-off donations are also appreciated. Choose The Amount You Wish To Contribute. If you do support us in this way we’d be interested to hear what kind of articles you would like to see more of on the site – send your suggestions to the editor. For businesses we offer the chance to be a corporate sponsor of community content on the site. For £30 plus VAT per month you will be the designated sponsor of at least one article a month with your logo appearing if supplied. If there is a specific community group or initiative you’d like to support we can make sure your sponsorship is featured on related content for a one off payment of £50 plus VAT. All payments are made through a secure web site.