A wildlife campaigner who has rescued thousands of creatures has won a David and Goliath legal battle after complaints about his sanctuary smelling of animals.

Geoff Grewcock, 74, and his daughter Emma Hudson, 41, have created a safe haven for sick and injured animals at their Nuneaton and Warwickshire Wildlife Sanctuary. The pair have helped save around 100,000 animals and birds over the past 23 years and provided rehabilitation to nurse them back to health.

The sanctuary itself is located behind Geoff’s bungalow and provides a free rescue service for animals while giving invaluable education to school children and community groups across the borough. In 2022 the future of the sanctuary was at risk after Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council slapped them with an abatement order following three complaints.

In a letter, the council said: “Evidence gathered demonstrated that the animal odour is causing a nuisance to people in the area. Animal odours from the sanctuary was witnessed on two separate occasions. On both occasions the officer was of the opinion that the odour was unpleasant and was present for a prolonged period which would prevent the complainant from enjoying the use of their property.”

One nearby resident said she could smell “stomach-wrenching odours”. Geoff and Emma were warned that if their sanctuary continued to smell, they faced a £20,000 fine or even criminal prosecution. The father and daughter team paid £25,000 in legal fees to fight the abatement notice.

On Tuesday (May 21) their appeal was upheld by District Judge David Wain at Birmingham Magistrates’ Court. Speaking afterwards, Emma said: “We are just ecstatic. We fought hard for something we believe in. We’re just little people and we took a whole council on.

“The council decided to investigate in 2021 and they performed what the district judge today called a complete investigation and that no nuisance was found. Subsequent investigations were carried out but were not complete and it was ruled that the odours, although unusual for a residential area, did not cause a nuisance.”

The case was adjourned to July 9 to deal with the issue of costs. A council spokesperson said the authority accepted the decision but was disappointed by the judgement. The authority added that it “has a statutory duty to carry out investigations in response to complaints received, and did so in this instance with utmost good faith”.