The Act refers to the Registrar by the masculine pronoun in the singular, but by the usual rules of statutory interpretation,[1] this is not limited to an individual male person.
The recurring controversy about whether statutory protection of title serves useful purposes has been intensified by the legislative impact of the EU Directive on Unfair Commercial Practices implemented in May 2008 by two Statutory Instruments under the European Communities Act 1972, namely No 1276 (Trade Descriptions)[2] and No 1277 (Consumer Protection).
The result was that Parliament, as the legislator and guided by the government of the day, has had to maintain a state of benevolent neutrality among the holders of these contending views, consistent with more general public policies for business competition, employment, professional education and so on.
In relation to statutory protection of title, three aspects of the field in which architects practise invite examination.
In summary: In the light of experience since the inception of the Register under the 1931 Act, and more particularly under the Architects Registration Board’s regime from 1997, the recurring question has been whether protection of title serves useful purposes in respect of the three aspects mentioned above.
Shortly after, in the book published on occasion of the Institute's centenary celebration in 1934,[4] in the concluding paragraphs of the chapter on statutory registration.,[5] Harry Barnes FRIBA., Chairman of the Registration Committee, wrote: After more than half a century times have changed and a regime of quite another kind has been installed under the 1997 Act.
1884 – Society of Architects formed, after a campaign by a group of ARIBA to be allowed to vote on RIBA affairs had been resisted by FRIBA.
(The provisions of the Act constituting the Board of Architectural Education were repealed when ARCUK was reconstituted as ARB in 1996/7.)
The letter is mentioned by Lord Goddard, Lord Chief Justice, in the course of his judgment in the Queen's Bench Divisional Court in 1957 allowing the appeal of an architect (Hughes) against a professional misconduct decision of the Discipline Committee of ARCUK (later renamed Architects Registration Board), a case which becomes cited in later cases and in legal text-books as a judicial precedent.
1993 – Warne Report published – principal recommendation: abolition of protection of title "architect" and disbanding of ARCUK.
2008 – Amendments made in June 2008 by Statutory Instrument established rules for the recognition of professional qualifications enabling migrants from the European Economic Area or Switzerland to register as architects in the United Kingdom.
The following analysis of the operative and other parts of the Architects Act 1997 as it was before the amendment of June 2008 pays attention to details which sometimes go unnoticed.
In particular, like many such Acts, it can be better understood by looking at its beginning (Arrangement of Sections and long title) and its end (derivations), as well as the operative part in between.
These included one to make clear that where there is a reference to "unacceptable professional conduct", it has the same meaning as it has in section 14 (not vice versa).
In subsection 14(1) the phrase is expanded as: "conduct which falls short of the standard required of a registered person".
The statutory choice is exercisable: The voluntary burdens which result from the exercise of the statutory choice are as follows: In consequence: A side effect of the Act is the imposition of burdens on third parties under Part II, namely, Schools of Architecture, but the effect of the changes made by the 1996 Act is that Schools of Architecture have disappeared from the legislation without trace.
The result has been a certain amount of wrangling between the Schools, the ARB and the RIBA which is the principal professional body, whose concerns inevitably include architectural education.
Another side effect has been a claim by the ARB to be able to impose on registered persons certain requirements about Professional Indemnity Insurance.
Although a criminal conviction is an objective criterion, no statutory definition is given that defines the level of professional conduct or incompetence that will attract a sanction, judgment in the matter being given to the Board's Professional Conduct Committee, subject to commonsense, reason and judicial review.
The June 2003 issue of the RIBA Journal included the following: In November 2003 the Architects Registration Board published a summary of a barrister's opinion which included the following: The Royal Institute of British Architects, which is a professional body (see Wikipedia category list British Professional Bodies), operates a voluntary "Chartered Practice" scheme.
A matrix can be applied as follows: The disparity arises from the European Directive on Mutual Recognition of Qualifications in Architecture 85/384/EC.
As this is a minimum requirement there is nothing to stop a country applying higher standards to those obtaining qualifications and experience within its own jurisdiction.
However it is widely held (and expressed in the report of Michael Highton to the RIBA Council) that any challenge to this disparity is likely to succeed on the grounds of irrationality.