Fearn v Tate Galleries: Privacy and the law of nuisance

Q2 Social Sciences
E. Lees
{"title":"Fearn v Tate Galleries: Privacy and the law of nuisance","authors":"E. Lees","doi":"10.1177/1461452921998452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This note considers the decision of the Court of Appeal in Fearn v Tate Galleries. It considers the Court’s decision specifically with regards to whether the law of private nuisance discloses an action in pure overlooking cases. It argues that as a matter of historical precedent, the Court of Appeal is correct in assessing that the weight of authority argues against such an action. It then analyses how the Court of Appeal’s reasoning can be viewed from the lens of understandings of property and ownership, and as part of the discussion of the interaction between planning and private law.","PeriodicalId":52213,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Law Review","volume":"70 1","pages":"49 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1461452921998452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This note considers the decision of the Court of Appeal in Fearn v Tate Galleries. It considers the Court’s decision specifically with regards to whether the law of private nuisance discloses an action in pure overlooking cases. It argues that as a matter of historical precedent, the Court of Appeal is correct in assessing that the weight of authority argues against such an action. It then analyses how the Court of Appeal’s reasoning can be viewed from the lens of understandings of property and ownership, and as part of the discussion of the interaction between planning and private law.
费恩诉泰特美术馆:隐私与妨害法
本说明考虑上诉法院对Fearn诉泰特美术馆案的裁决。它特别考虑了法院关于私人滋扰法是否披露了纯粹忽视案件中的行为的裁决。它认为,从历史先例来看,上诉法院正确地判断,权威的重要性不利于采取这种行动。然后,它分析了如何从对财产和所有权的理解的角度来看待上诉法院的推理,并作为计划法和私法之间相互作用的讨论的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Law Review
Environmental Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信