- Judicial interpretation relating to Part III : some useful guidance on the meaning of "standards", "serious" and "unacceptable".
- Discipline and questionable PCC decisions : powers, duties and criticisms of the PCC.
- Case Study 1 : procedural irregularities and two perverse decisions in consideration of charges brought under Code Standard 8.
- Case Study 2 (Part 1) : a similar case, involving the apprehension of a real possibility of bias.
- Case Study 2 (continued - Part 2) : the PCC decide – and a question of incongruity arises.
- Note on Part III of the Architects Act 1997 - should the legislation be further amended to save the Board from the charge of jactitation of power?
- Case Study 2 (continued - Part 4) - "Judicial nonsense".
- Case Study 2 (continued - Part 5) - A Court decision in favour of the architect.
- Case Study 2 (continued - Parts 6, 7 and 8) - (6) The Court rules architect's application for judicial review "plainly justified" - 14 October 2008; (7) the case is remitted by Consent Order of the High Court - 21 August 2009; and (8) the proceedings are withdrawn - 7 April 2010.
- Case Study 2 (continued - Parts 9 and 10) - Report on outcome of proceedings.
- Case Study 2 (continued - Part 11) - How the Board deals with the result.
Case Study 2 (continued - Part 12) - ARB misclaims "new evidence".
Case Study 2 (continued - Part 13) - New Guidance - December 2010.
On a QC's advice, the architect has an obvious and complete defence to the charge originated by the Board's Investigation Committee at the instance of the then Registrar (Robin Vaughan). The PCC hearing on 17 and 18 September 2007 was adjourned part heard. For a comment on the second day of the hearing see Case Study 2, Part 4.
|Architects Registration Board|
|- competence to practise|
|Professional standards - the code, etc|
|Use of title|
|Links to websites:|
|- chartered bodies|
|- historical notes|