- No nuisance by overlooking (Fearn v Trustees of the Tate Gallery)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Property Disputes analysis: In this case, the Court of Appeal firmly rejected the proposition that overlooking, even on a substantial scale (by many hundreds of thousands of people a year, using cameras and in some cases binoculars), could by itself constitute a private nuisance. Guy Fetherstonhaugh QC, Falcon Chambers, provides further analysis of this decision.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial