Fearn v Tate Gallery (2020) EWCA Civ 104 raises important issues about the application of the common law cause of action for private nuisance to overlooking from one property to another, and the consequent invasion of privacy of those occupying the overlooked property. The Court of Appeal held that (1) mere overlooking is not capable of giving rise to a cause of action for private nuisance: paragraphs 74 and 85; and (2) there is no sound reason to extend the common law tort of private nuisance to overlooking in the light of ECHR Article 8: paragraph 95.

This entry was posted on Friday, February 14th, 2020 at 8:00 am and is filed under Land, Goods and Services. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.