ARTICLE
24 February 2020

Curtains Closed On Tate Modern View

CC
Collas Crill

Contributor

Collas Crill is an offshore law firm with offices in BVI, Cayman, Guernsey, Jersey and London.

We deliver a comprehensive range of legal services to clients locally and globally in four broad practice areas: Financial Services and Regulatory; Insolvency and Corporate Disputes; Private Client and Trusts; and Real Estate.

Clients include some of the world’s leading financial institutions, international businesses, trusts and funds, as well as high-net-worth individuals and families across the globe. We continue to build a network of independent and trusted partners around the world including the Caribbean, the Channel Islands, the UK, Europe, the US, the Middle East, South Africa and Asia.

Last year, we prepared an article looking into the legal conflict between the Tate Modern and the residents of NEO Bankside, an exclusive development of luxury apartments on the banks of the River
Jersey Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Last year, we prepared an article looking into the legal conflict between the Tate Modern and the residents of NEO Bankside, an exclusive development of luxury apartments on the banks of the River Thames. The issue concerned the Tate Modern's recently-completed viewing gallery, which provides spectacular panoramic views of the London skyline and, most contentiously, the livingrooms of the neighbouring multi-million pound apartments.

At the time of our previous article, the owners' claim against the Tate Modern in nuisance had been dismissed. The ruling judge had suggested that the owners might consider installing some net curtains.

Aggrieved by this decision, the owners appealed to the Court of Appeal. The recently handed-down decision of Fearn and Others v The Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2020] EWCA Civ 104 is, again, given in favour of the gallery. Although noted as being for differing reasons, the ruling judge affirmed the decision of the lower Court. The case of the owners failed to convince the Court that being overlooked could amount an actionable nuisance.

Save for any further appeal (which would now have to be to the Supreme Court), it may be 'curtains' for this particular dispute.

The judgment can be accessed here.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More