A new viewing platform at the Tate Modern intrudes on the privacy of people who live in the neighbouring flats, the UK supreme court has ruled.
A majority decision from the court says the four owners of the flats in question, who were the claimants in the case, faced ‘near constant observation’ from visitors to the platform.
Many of the hundreds of thousands of people who travel to the top of the Blavatnik Building, which opened in 2016, ‘take photographs and post them on social media’, the judges said.
In its decision, the court said that this ‘substantial interference’ with the lives of the flat residents, combined with the conclusion that a viewing platform is not an ‘ordinary use’ of the gallery’s land, meant the Tate was liable to the claimants.
Giving background to the case, the judges wrote: ‘The trial judge found that a very significant number of visitors display an interest in the interiors of the claimants’ flats.
‘Some look, some peer, some photograph, some wave.
‘Occasionally binoculars are used.’
The platform at the Blavatnik Building has been closed since the beginning of the Covid pandemic, and no date has yet been given for its reopening.
When it was open, entry was free to all visitors, with the Tate website saying: ‘Enjoy a drink and snacks from the bar as you see across the River Thames, St Paul’s Cathedral, and as far as Canary Wharf and Wembley Stadium.’
The open terrace, at its closest point, was 34 metres away from the 18th floor flat in the Neo Bankside development, which was completed in 2012.
Residents first launched the legal action in 2017, with documents claiming the flats had been turned into a ‘goldfish bowl’.
They applied for an injunction that would require the gallery to block off part of the platform or put up screens to stop visitors seeing into their homes.
However, the supreme court left the question of an ‘appropriate remedy’ to the High Court to decide.
The judges were split 3-2 in the final decision, with Lord Leggatt gives the majority judgment and Lord Reed and Lord Lloyd-Jones agreeing.
The dissenting judgment was given by Lord Sales, with Lord Kitchin agreeing.
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
from News – Metro https://ift.tt/ZsrHazf
0 Comments