Tate Modern privacy case judgment
Today saw the much awaited judgment in the Tate Modern privacy case handed down by the High Court.
The case related to the viewing platform on the recently constructed extension to the Tate Modern and was brought by a group of owners of apartments in the neighbouring Neo Bankside development. The owners claimed that the use of the viewing platform by the public, which overlooked their apartments, breached their rights to ‘private and family life’ under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and therefore caused a legal nuisance.
Nuisance cases historically relate to noise emanating from a property or physical activity on land that prevents the enjoyment of neighbouring property. It is important to understand that whilst the law does protect a right to receive daylight to windows in a building, it doesn’t provide any right to a particular view from those windows nor does it prevent overlooking of the windows by neighbouring buildings. Some of these issues will be considered in the planning context but this case was about private legal rights between the owners of neighbouring properties.
In a seventy page judgment Mr Justice Mann reviewed the planning and construction history of both the extension to the Tate Modern and the Neo Bankside development. He also explored the law of nuisance and spent a fair amount of time looking at Human Rights. His decision breaks new legal ground and confirms that the law of nuisance will protect privacy rights from overlooking in an appropriate case. He cited the passing of the Human Rights Act in 1998 as being relevant to his decision even though he found that the Tate Gallery was not a public authority to whom the Act applied.
However, having made that unexpected leap, he then went on to find that on the facts of this case no actionable nuisance was established. Those reading the Judgment might find this surprising given the estimates of around 600,000 visitors to the viewing platform each year. He accepted evidence that binoculars and cameras were used to see inside the Claimants’ apartments. Against that he considered the inner city urban environment and what an occupant of an apartment in this setting might reasonably expect. He found that the operation of an art gallery with a viewing platform in this location wasn’t unreasonable. Much focus was placed on the design of the apartments and the extensive use of glass. In summing up the Judge said that the Claimants had ‘…created or submitted themselves to a sensitivity to privacy which is greater than would be the case of a less-glassed design’. He also ran through the steps which the owners could take to reduce the impact which included solar blinds and net curtains.
An important feature of the decision was the Tate Gallery having significantly reduced the opening hours of the viewing platform which is something that the Judge required to be recorded in undertakings to the Court.
Land Registry promises fully digital registration services by 2025
The Mail Online quotes David Gregory on the mini budget and changes to the real estate industry
"This is a step in the right direction, but further support for existing occupiers may be needed..."
Piers Master and Jack Carter write for International Adviser on the register of overseas entities
How UK register of overseas entities impacts advice clients
Ten Years Since The 2012 Saudi Arbitration Law: Where Are We Now?
London’s role in the growing UK Life Sciences sector
Mark Kildea, Howard de Walden’s Chief Executive and Cara Imrailo discuss Life Sciences opportunities in London
Property Patter: The Notorious ESG?
ESG is everywhere.
Lesley O'Leary writes for The Law Society Gazette on law firm strategy
‘You need to have a frank discussion about the things that matter to clients’
Melanie Tomlin explains the measure of damages recoverable in defects claims for Building Magazine
Essential law: Defects, part four
The Energy Savings Opportunity Scheme
The aim of the scheme is to help organisations identify energy efficiency savings, to support and increase good energy management.
Aidan Welton writes for P3 Pharmacy on property considerations before selling a pharmacy business
There’s lots to consider ahead of time if you’re planning the sale of your pharmacy business...
Melania Constable writes for Property Week on restructuring in the property sector
It is anticipated this judgment may open the gates to further uptake of RPs in the property sector...
Charles Russell Speechlys advises Silbury Finance (backed by Oaktree Capital Management) on a £73.8m senior debt facility
Advising Silbury Finance to finance the development of 215 unit residential-for-sale scheme in York known as The Gasworks.
Jeffrey Lee and Silvia On interview on the rivalry between Hong Kong and Singapore in Asian Private Banker
Jeffrey Lee and Silvia On offer views on wealth planning in Hong Kong and Singapore
Louise Ward comments for EG on potential planning reforms for the life sciences industry
Life sciences experts back potential planning reforms
Could a shortage of lab space be a golden opportunity?
Charles Russell Speechlys advises Topland Group on new joint venture and £50m acquisition and financing of Allen House
Charles Russell Speechlys completes third major transaction with Topland Group this year
Reem Al Mahroos
Source of Funds: New Reporting Requirements for Real Estate Transactions in the UAE
Steven Carey and Carolyn Davies write for Construction News on a recent cladding court ruling
Cladding court ruling provides post-Grenfell liability pointers
Simon Green and Reem Al Mahroos write for Real Estate Asia on the trend of 'revenge tourism'
Revenge tourism is the new direction of travel for Asia...