Following the rejection of Spurs’ and Leyton Orient’s challenges to the Olympic Park Legacy Company’s decision to award the new stadium to West Ham, Spurs have since renewed their fight for judicial review.
Last week, Judge Mr Justice Davis claimed the north London football club had no grounds for a review.
But on Wednesday (29 June), Spurs issued the following statement: “The club has today applied to the High Court to renew its application for permission to bring a claim against the London Borough of Newham and the Olympic Park Legacy Company, the Mayor of London and Government Ministers for judicial review of their decisions underlying the bid process for the conversion of the Olympic Stadium after the 2012 Games.
“Under this process the club now has the opportunity to present its case at an oral hearing at the High Court.”
Currently, West Ham are set to take over the Olympic Stadium having arranged a £40million loan with Newham Council that will allow the club to move from Upton Park.
West Ham have promised to develop the venue so that it will host “world-class sporting events, including top-level football and athletics”.
But Spurs have set their sights on the stadium since their plans to regenerate their current home at White Hart Lane proved to be financially unviable.
Their current capacity at White Hart Lane is just 36,000 compared to potential space for 60,000 at the Stratford Olympic Stadium.
David Lammy, MP for Tottenham, said to Spurs fans during a Q and A session: “The uncertainty isn’t good for the fans, as they don’t know whether the directors are committed to staying in Tottenham – the place that has been home to the club since its birth.
“And it isn’t good for the people of Tottenham, who need to know what is happening to the redevelopment of Northumberland Park.
“I would prefer the club to put its time and money into working with Spurs fans, Tottenham residents, the Mayor, government, council and I to deliver a new stadium in Tottenham.”
Should Spurs or West Ham be awarded the Olympic Stadium? Give your opinion in the FindLaw Community.
You may also like:
- Media law: National Union of Journalists issue legal challenge to…
- Legal aid: Barristers go ahead with strike
- Policing: Home Secretary to launch enquiry into police custody deaths
- Terrorism: High Court rules Charity Commission will face judicial review…
- Family law: UN advises Britain to make smacking children illegal