Fearn v Tate Gallery
| Fearn v Tate Gallery | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Supreme Court of the United Kingdom |
| Full case name | Fearn and others v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery |
| Decided | 1 February 2023 |
| Citation | [2023] UKSC 4 |
| Transcript | Full text of judgment |
| Case history | |
| Appealed from |
|
| Court membership | |
| Judges sitting | |
Fearn v Tate Gallery [2023] UKSC 4 is a judgment of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom on the tort of private nuisance.
Facts
Fearn v Tate Gallery concerned a nuisance claim arising from the defendant's operation of a public viewing gallery, which allowed large numbers of visitors to look directly into the claimants' neighbouring flats.[1]
Judgment
Lord Leggatt delivered the majority judgment.[2]
The Supreme Court held that visual intrusion can in principle amount to a nuisance, and on the facts, a narrow 3:2 majority found that the Tate Modern was liable for the operation of a viewing gallery from which the public could see straight into the claimants' luxury flats.[3]
References
Citations
- ↑ Chen 2026, p. 15.
- ↑ Hariharan 2023, p. 701.
- ↑ Hariharan 2023, p. 698.
Bibliography
- Chen, Chen (6 February 2026). "The Unfinished Architecture of Private Nuisance: Bridging the Gap Between Coventry v Lawrence and Fearn v Tate Gallery". Cambridge Law Journal. Cambridge University Press: 1–32. doi:10.1017/S0008197325101116. ISSN 0008-1973.
This article incorporates text from this source, which is available under the CC BY 4.0 license. - Hariharan, Jeevan (24 October 2023). "The View from the Top: Visual Intrusion as Nuisance in Fearn v Tate Gallery". Modern Law Review. 87 (3). Wiley: 697–714. doi:10.1111/1468-2230.12850. eISSN 1468-2230. ISSN 0026-7961. This article incorporates text from this source, which is available under the CC BY 4.0 license.