header-logo header-logo

27 June 2019 / Nicholas Dobson
Issue: 7846 / Categories: Features , Public , Property
printer mail-detail

Tate-à-tête?

Is the Tate a public authority? Nicholas Dobson examines a recent ruling on nuisance & nosiness

  • Apartment owners overlooked by the Tate Modern’s viewing gallery had no right to privacy under the Human Rights Act 1998. There was also no actionable nuisance.

There’s always something, isn’t there? For biblical Adam and Eve, the Garden of Eden would have been great if the serpent hadn’t turned up to poop the party. Roses would be fine but for the thorns. And we could live with morning wake-up alarms if they just gave up going off. But, as the eccentric philosopher noted in James Stephens’s comic novel The Crock of Gold in 1912: ‘Nothing is perfect’.

And so it was for the owners of four flats in a development adjacent to the Tate Modern Museum, whose prime views from prestige apartments unfortunately came with privacy issues. For their living areas are extensively glassed and look directly on to a new Tate Modern extension. And around the tenth floor of the extension a viewing walkway affords Tate Modern visitors

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll