费恩诉泰特美术馆:隐私与妨害法

Q2 Social Sciences Environmental Law Review Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.1177/1461452921998452
E. Lees
{"title":"费恩诉泰特美术馆:隐私与妨害法","authors":"E. Lees","doi":"10.1177/1461452921998452","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This note considers the decision of the Court of Appeal in Fearn v Tate Galleries. It considers the Court’s decision specifically with regards to whether the law of private nuisance discloses an action in pure overlooking cases. It argues that as a matter of historical precedent, the Court of Appeal is correct in assessing that the weight of authority argues against such an action. It then analyses how the Court of Appeal’s reasoning can be viewed from the lens of understandings of property and ownership, and as part of the discussion of the interaction between planning and private law.","PeriodicalId":52213,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Law Review","volume":"70 1","pages":"49 - 55"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fearn v Tate Galleries: Privacy and the law of nuisance\",\"authors\":\"E. Lees\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1461452921998452\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This note considers the decision of the Court of Appeal in Fearn v Tate Galleries. It considers the Court’s decision specifically with regards to whether the law of private nuisance discloses an action in pure overlooking cases. It argues that as a matter of historical precedent, the Court of Appeal is correct in assessing that the weight of authority argues against such an action. It then analyses how the Court of Appeal’s reasoning can be viewed from the lens of understandings of property and ownership, and as part of the discussion of the interaction between planning and private law.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52213,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Law Review\",\"volume\":\"70 1\",\"pages\":\"49 - 55\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1461452921998452\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1461452921998452","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本说明考虑上诉法院对Fearn诉泰特美术馆案的裁决。它特别考虑了法院关于私人滋扰法是否披露了纯粹忽视案件中的行为的裁决。它认为,从历史先例来看,上诉法院正确地判断,权威的重要性不利于采取这种行动。然后,它分析了如何从对财产和所有权的理解的角度来看待上诉法院的推理,并作为计划法和私法之间相互作用的讨论的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Fearn v Tate Galleries: Privacy and the law of nuisance
This note considers the decision of the Court of Appeal in Fearn v Tate Galleries. It considers the Court’s decision specifically with regards to whether the law of private nuisance discloses an action in pure overlooking cases. It argues that as a matter of historical precedent, the Court of Appeal is correct in assessing that the weight of authority argues against such an action. It then analyses how the Court of Appeal’s reasoning can be viewed from the lens of understandings of property and ownership, and as part of the discussion of the interaction between planning and private law.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Law Review
Environmental Law Review Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
期刊最新文献
Book Review: The North Sea System for Petroleum Production, State Intervention on the British and Norwegian Continental Shelves by Brent F Nelsen and Tina Soliman Hunter Ecological constitutionalism within the Canadian context: Charter-ing international standards of the human right to a healthy environment From farm to fork? Brexit and the International Plant Protection Convention Transfer of ESTs in international law: A climate justice approach Biodiversity management challenges: A policy brief
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1