The Round-up

February 2020

Adam Swirsky explains how the law of nuisance cannot be used to protect privacy rights in light of the recent case of Fearn & others v Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2020] EWCA Civ 104.

Dominic Bright discusses whether a typographical error invalidates a possession order or if the test of the reasonable recipient provide protection against invalidation in relation to the case of Pease v Carter & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 175.

Barbara Zeitler analyses the meaning of ‘provision, criterion or practice’ for employers when making reasonable adjustments in respect of a disabled person in regards to the case of Ishola v Transport for London (TfL) [2020] EWCA Civ 112.

Our Expertise