Lucy Mayer spoke to Susan Cusack after the announcement for The Wimbledon Park Project was announced.

The group is fearful that the environment will be irrevocably harmed.

Statement from Save Wimbledon Park.

Supporters of this campaign will be disappointed to learn that Mr Justice Saini has declined to overturn the GLA’s planning decision of November 2024.

SWP is grateful for the careful consideration given by the Judge but has been advised that it should make an application for permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

Initially this application will be made to the Judge himself, but the Court of Appeal may also grant permission.

SWP is not taking this step lightly but believes that the GLA did make a significant legal error in the way it dealt with the special legal status of the Park.

Christopher Coombe, Director of SWP said: “This judgment would, if it stands, set a worrying precedent for the unwanted development of protected green belt and public open spaces around London and across the country.

“The AELTC will surely have noted the considerable public outrage about this development, most recently expressed outside the law courts, and we continue to hope that they could be persuaded to engage constructively with us, with a view to achieving a resolution of this four-year-old dispute.”

Even if the planning decision is upheld, there are two other major legal protections for the Park which property developers would find insurmountable.

The AELTC has conceded that their planned development is incompatible with the statutory public recreation trust, which according to the GLA’s own advice is present over the relevant land. The existence or otherwise of a statutory trust is the subject of entirely separate proceedings which are very much alive and progressing towards a major hearing next January.

Whatever the outcome of these two court cases, the restrictive covenants preventing building and development remain firmly in place. As the Judge remarked: “It is not in issue that the Golf Course Land is the subject of restrictive covenants which require it to be kept open and free of built development”.

The covenants were put in place in 1993 to ensure that the AELTC kept to its promise never to develop the land. Without that formal promise, AELTC would not have been able to purchase part of the freehold of the
Park in the first place. The AELTC scheme cannot proceed unless the covenants are released by Merton Council.

The basis upon which Merton might perhaps lawfully release the covenant is very different from the considerations supporting the planning decision.

SWP will continue, with the aid of its many supporters, to fight for the right future for Wimbledon Park.

A Wandsworth Council spokesperson has told us:

“The plans are damaging to the environment and require industrial scale development, something we know is not right for our community. We will continue to work alongside local residents to ensure that the voices of those in Wandsworth are heard.”

A spokesperson for Merton Council said: “The GLA has decided to grant planning permission for AELTC’s proposed development.

“Just like the previous decision made by Merton Council to resolve to grant planning permission, acting in its capacity as a planning authority, the GLA has made a planning judgement based on planning policies.

“When the Council sold the land to AELTC in 1993, it imposed restrictive covenants to preserve the openness of the land. The covenants are intended to provide an added layer of protection for that openness over and above the protection afforded by the planning system.

“The planning system and property covenants are two separate things. And the granting of planning permission does not override the covenants nor make them unenforceable.

“It is only if and when a development has been granted planning permission that the covenants can perform their intended role. The proposed development does not protect the openness of the land so it would breach the covenants.

“When deciding whether to enforce the covenants, the Council is not acting as a planning authority and is not bound by any planning decision. Instead, the Council is free to decide whether it believes that sacrificing the openness of the land, and thereby defeating the purpose of the covenants, would be in the long-term interests of the locality.

“In the context of the current proposals, the Council has repeatedly stated that it intends that the covenants be respected.

“Whilst we recognise that AELTC’s plans have generated a lot of public interest, the Council is unable to say any more at this stage.”

Commenting, Wimbledon MP Paul Kohler said:

“Today’s ruling makes it all the more urgent that Merton Council stops hiding behind process and gives residents a straight answer. Will they enforce the legally binding promise made to the people of Wimbledon to keep this land free from development, or will they continue to dodge the question in the hope it can be quietly ignored?”

“If the answer is no, they need to explain why they are abandoning their legal duty to protect this land, and why they think the word of the Council, recorded in official minutes and backed by legal instruments, counts for so little.”

Radio Jackie has contacted the GLA and the All England Lawn and Tennis Club for comment.