Search Results

letter to Merton Council reminding them that the lands of the Wimbledon Park Golf Course are subject to Covenants The letter explains why the Covenants block the proposed development and why we consider that it and

Council Leader Ross Garrod , correcting Merton Council's incorrect statement about the 1993 restrictive covenants

the Constitution, the extraordinary meeting will consider the following single item of business: “The Covenants

The Standard | 30th September 2024 | Noah Vickers " The plan, which won permission from City Hall last week, will see 39 new tennis courts built on a former golf course "Campaigners opposed to the Wimbledon tennis expansion plan have vowed to fight on following their defeat at City Hall, and are considering legal action to stop the scheme. The project, which secured planning permission last week, will see the construction of 39 new courts - including an 8,000-seater stadium - on a golf course across the road from the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club’s (AELTC) existing site." ... read more about The Standard: Campaigners consider legal action in bid to 'fight on' against Wimbledon expansion

Whilst even if the AELTC surmount these hurdles, the land is still held subject to the covenants agreed Provided Merton Council enforce the covenants, no amount of planning permission can override them.

In the meantime, there still remain the covenants in which the AELTC publicly promised on their purchase The development is incompatible with these covenants, as Merton have already reminded them, saying that they expect the covenants to be “respected”.

It is in the North Wimbledon Conservation Area and, together with the legal Covenants placed upon it, AELTC, who agreed to the Covenants and their restrictions, are now proposing to bulldoze almost all of

Further to our news post of 3rd January 2025 where SWP had applied for a Judicial Review of the GLA planning decision : Surprisingly quickly, the Court has just now issued an Order confirming that we may proceed on all three Grounds for JR of the GLA’s decision, stating: “The Claimant has raised arguable grounds which merit consideration at a full hearing.” SWP’s request for costs protection under the Aarhus Convention was not challenged. The Court’s order also confirms that we have successfully achieved this protection.

of the planning decision for legality (“Judicial Review”), the enforcement of the 1993 restrictive covenants

mention that the club agreed when it bought the land in 1993 never to develop it, and a restrictive covenant

to take into account the implications of the statutory Public Recreation Trust and the restrictive covenants There are still the important 1993 restrictive covenants. Although the covenants have been dismissed by AELTC and Merton Council as “not a planning issue”, our which we can also pursue, regarding both the statutory public recreation trust and the restrictive covenants

at a meeting on the evening of Thursday, October 26 with Wandsworth Council, whose boundaries also cover London Mayor Sadiq Khan and the Greater London Authority, with arguments not just over planning but covenants