*Please note that the links to the content in this Part will direct you to Westlaw AU.<\/p>\n
To purchase an article, please email: LTA.Service@thomsonreuters.com or contact us on 1300 304 195 (Australian customers) or +61 2 8587 7980 (international customers) during business hours (Mon-Fri, 8am-6pm AST).<\/p>\n
The latest issue of The Tort Law Review (Volume 28 Part 3) contains the following material:<\/p>\n
Throwing Stones in Glass Houses: Protecting Privacy under the Law of Nuisance<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Cheng Lim Saw and Aaron Yoong<\/p>\n The limits of the law of nuisance were recently tested in the controversial decisions of Fearn v Tate Gallery Board of Trustees<\/em>, both before the High Court and Court of Appeal. Against the backdrop of these decisions, this article argues that the tort of private nuisance can indeed, in appropriate cases, protect against invasions of privacy caused by overlooking \u00e2\u20ac\u201c all within the present framework and ambit of the action. It is also proposed that a communitarian approach be adopted in fashioning the appropriate remedy for actions founded in nuisance.<\/p>\n Click here to access article on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n Privacy Protection against Physical Intrusion: Development of a Pure Intrusion Tort in England and Wales<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Remigius N Nwabueze<\/p>\n Invasion of privacy is a contemporary legal issue, catapulted to the forefront of minds in cases such as HRH Sussex\u00e2\u20ac\u2122s highly publicised case. While causes of action for misuse of private information and breach of confidence are feasible legal avenues in England and Wales, these predominantly protect disclosure of private and confidential information, and do not fully cover cases of pure physical intrusion \u00e2\u20ac\u201c where the invasion of privacy does not involve publication of private information. Thus, a new pure intrusion tort is needed. Consequently, this article proposes the development of a pure intrusion tort in England and Wales, including the potential elements and scope of such a tort.<\/p>\n Click here to access article on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n Contributory Negligence and the Intoxicated Passenger<\/strong><\/em><\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Keith Patten<\/p>\n The recent Court of Appeal decision of Campbell v Advantage Insurance Co <\/em>deals with an important issue of the nature of the test for contributory negligence where an intoxicated passenger is injured while being carried in a vehicle driven by an intoxicated driver. This article argues that in relation to the type of cases under consideration the court was right to adopt an objective approach, but that consideration should be given to applying a more subjective test in contributory negligence cases more generally.<\/p>\n Click here to access article on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n BOOK REVIEW<\/a> \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Editor: Tina Popa<\/em><\/p>\n Click here to access on New Westlaw<\/a><\/p>\n For the PDF version of the table of contents, click here: Westlaw AU \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Tort L Rev Vol 28 No 3 Contents<\/a> or here: New Westlaw AU \u00e2\u20ac\u201c Tort L Rev Vol 28 No 3 Contents<\/a>.<\/p>\n Click here to access this Part on Westlaw AU<\/a><\/p>\n Click here to access this Part on New Westlaw AU<\/a><\/p>\n\n