Legal challenge opposes eviction of popular north London cafe operators

The cafes are run by Hoxton Beach Limited, which had its tenancies for the Highgate Wood Cafe, the Refreshment Pavillion, and the Lido Kiosk Cafe terminated at the end of 2025.  

This decision sparked a strong response, with a petition opposing it having gathered around 25,000 signatures and celebrities including Benedict Cumberbatch, James McAvoy and Stefan Campbell Moore supporting the cafe operators. Now, legal action has been launched to attempt to reverse the decision. 

Hoxton Beach, owned and run by Patrick Matthews and Emma Fernandez, has been operating the Lido Kiosk Cafe at Parliament Hill since April 2018, the Refreshment Pavilion at Queen’s Park since autumn 2018, and the Highgate Wood Cafe since May 2019.  

All three have been commercially successful businesses and have a strong reputation in the local area.  

However, in July 2025, the City of London Corporation (CLC) announced that it would be reviewing the tenders of the cafes as part of a re-marketing process, and invited applications to operate the cafes. 

In September, Hoxton Beach submitted its application to continue running the cafes and in December, owners Mr Matthews and Ms Fernandez were informed that the company’s leases would not be renewed.  

This decision was formally communicated in January 2026, with cafe chain Daisy Green set to take over and Hoxton Beach given just four weeks' notice to vacate.  

Hoxton Beach operators Mr Matthews and Ms Fernandez, who are bringing the claim, say that they did not initially receive any information about why their proposals had not met CLC’s criteria, and that they received no communication during the tendering process until the phone call in December informing them that their bids had been unsuccessful.  

The Hoxton Beach owners say CLC failed to meet their legal duty of candour, and some issues raised since by CLC lack accuracy. CLC now says Hoxton Beach owes money to HMRC – a standard practice for highly seasonal cafes during the winter months, with income from summer months making up for the winter deficit and payment plans agreed to manage this.  

Mr Matthews and Ms Fernandez say that because issues such as this were never raised during the tendering process, they were not given adequate opportunity to address them.  

Issues have also been raised by Mr Matthews and Ms Fernandez with an open letter penned by CLC in January 2026, which alleges that Hoxton Beach is engaging in a misleading campaign to gather support for its campaign to stay in operation of the cafes.  

On 27 January, Hoxton Beach sent a pre-action protocol letter to CLC, putting forward its legal arguments and calling for the process of changing tenancies to be paused while a legal challenge is made. Information regarding the decision making of CLC was also requested.  

Now, lawyers from Leigh Day representing Hoxton Beach have submitted an application for a judicial review claim challenging the decision to change the operator of the cafes.  

The Hoxton Beach owners are crowdfunding to support their case. 

Hoxton Beach co-owner Emma Fernandez said: 

“We believe that the City of London has acted unlawfully and are incredibly grateful to our counsel and solicitors for the work they are putting in this case. We are also incredibly grateful to our community for their incredible support - as always, we remain open to engage with the City of London for negotiations should they wish to reach out.”  

Leigh Day partner Ricardo Gama, who represents Hoxton Beach’s owners, said: 

“Our clients have successfully operated these three cafes for a number of years now, and during this time have built a strong reputation and gained considerable popularity. But despite their clear success, they now face losing the leases for these cafes. 

“They argue that the process undertaken by the City of London Corporation has not been a fair one. The decision-making process has been taken behind closed doors and then presented to Corporation’s consultative committees and to our clients as a fait accompli. They believe that the Corporation is acting not like a public authority with specific statutory duties, but instead like a commercial landowner, and not a very rational one at that.  

“In filing this judicial review claim, Mr Matthews and Ms Fernandez hope that the decision to end their tenancies will be reconsidered.”