- Composition of the Board

- Regulations made by ARCUK

- 2 Questions : How does the Architects Registration Board answer inquiries?

- The wider remit : an observation on the claim of former Board chairman Humphrey Lloyd that "Arb only fulfils its statutory role, no more".

- 2009 election : A majority of candidates support reform.

- Status of the Registrar as Registrar and when acting as Returning Officer.

- Occasional notes of Board Meetings.

- RIBA Report On the Registration and Regulation of Architects by Sir Christopher Ball

- ARB and its statutory functions: another judicial precedent (April 2010)

- On persons offered appointment to the ARB or its PCC. (April 2010)

- The ARB continues to misconduct itself (May 2012)


An issue concerning the effect of governing legislation when determining a duty of care                      (17 April 2010)

The ARB is a public body having statutory functions; and architects who are registered (or entitled to be) are among the persons most nearly affected (in their livelihood and reputation) by its performance or non-performance of the functions which have been assigned to it by the governing legislation.

In this connection a Court of Appeal decision in March 2010 is an authoritative judicial precedent upholding and applying the legal principle that such a body owes a duty of care to persons affected by its performance or non-performance of its statutory functions, such as could be a cause of action for damages in the event of negligence on the part of that body. The case was reported in The Times newspaper on 29 March 2010 headed Council failed in duty to school head: Court of Appeal: Connor v Surrey County Council.)

In the course of the Court's reserved judgment dismissing the public authority's appeal it was said: "The standard tests of legality, rationality and fairness had to be met as they applied to the use of the public law power in the particular case. The principle in Padfield v Minister of Agriculture ([1968] AC 997) was in point where the question was whether public law powers could lawfully be used for a seemingly collateral end, here the fulfilment of a private law duty of care." (Lord Justice Laws)

The claimant was a head teacher, the defendant was Surrey County Council. The issue concerned the effect of legislation when determining the councilís duty of care (viz., sections 14 and 16A of the School Standards and Frameworks Act 1998, as amended by the Education Acts of 2002 and 2005 and the Education and Inspections Act 2006).

The case is obviously distinguishable on the facts and circumstances from the doings of the ARB, but its relevance is unmistakable. Inquirers and policy-makers may need to take this into account* (as well as persons offered appointment to the ARB "by the Privy Council, after consultation with the Secretary of State and such other persons or bodies as the Privy Council thinks fit, to represent the interests of users of architectural services and the general public"; or its PCC: see Arb web pages a) giving notice of vacancies to the chair(s) of the PCC and application form or, if unavailable, cached copies of the same  - Vacancies; Form).

*See note following on persons offered appointment to the ARB or its PCC.

[ top]

Architects Act
Architects Registration Board
- education
- competence to practise
Professional standards - the code, etc
Use of title
Links to websites:
- chartered bodies
- historical notes