Mr Justice Thompsell, ruling in The AELTG v Save Wimbledon Park [2026] EWHC 628 (Ch) last week, held in favour of the claimant’s bid to extend its facilities onto golf course land in Wimbledon Park. The organisation, Save Wimbledon Park, was formed by local residents opposed to the plans to build a stadium and further 38 tennis courts. It has applied for permission to appeal.
Save Wimbledon Park argued the golf course land was held by London Borough of Merton under s 164, Public Health Act 1875, when the freehold was sold in 1993, and was therefore subject to a statutory trust. It contended the Supreme Court’s decision in R (on the application of Day) v Shropshire Council [2023] UKSC 8 applied, which meant the land remained subject to the statutory trust unless and until certain statutory advertisement and consultation requirements were met.
AELTG argued Day did not apply because the land had not been made available for public use as it was let to a private golf club on an exclusive basis. Although s 164 imposed a duty on councils to allow public use, unless and until the council did so, the rights of the public under the statutory trust did not arise.
Save Wimbledon Park countered that golf club members and guests are members of the public, and that locals regularly took a shortcut across the land.
However, Thompsell J said: ‘The fact that there may be trespassers on the land does not change the use of the land. There is ample evidence [the golf club and council] were concerned throughout in maintaining walls or fences to keep the public off... The fact that some people may have surmounted or found a way through the obstacles that were there is irrelevant.’
He said: ‘In essence I have found that land that had never been appropriated or designated for the purposes of public enjoyment could be sold without imposing onto the purchaser a public trust where one had never been before.’
