Issue 1

2 January
February2004
2003

Practice section
RIBA and ARB
CPD events
New copyright laws
How you use the internet
CPD monitoring online

This months highlights

II
VI
VI
IX
X

Briefing

XII

Events

XII

Regions and International

XII

Membership

XIII

Online

XIII

Obituaries

XV

Apparently some practice librarians cut out or

use, your practice needs to buy a licence,

copy these pages and stick them in a file. This

costing about 1,000 a year for a large firm or

months invaluable chart listing the

95 for a small one. The other reason not to

differences between the RIBA and the ARB

copy the pages and stick them in a file is that

(see below) is a prime candidate for such

they are online and fully searchable on the

treatment. But read on and youll see that

RIBA website. The internet as a library is just

might not be such a good idea.

one of its many uses, but as researcher Bhzad

For a start, new copyright regulations mean

that to photocopy magazines for commercial

Sidawi shows (page IX), architects have yet to

discover its full potential.

Professional bodies

RIBA and ARB compared

The long-standing controversy between the RIBA and the ARB may appear confusing and arcane,
even to those directly involved. Although the issues are complex, the principal differences
between these two organisations are clear. The table below gives simple answers to those
straightforward questions that the RIBA is frequently asked by our members and the public about
the relative roles and remits of the RIBA and the ARB.

Royal Institute of British

Architects (RIBA)

Architects Registration
Board (ARB)

What is it?

What is it?

A professional society of individuals for the

A statutory body corporate for keeping a

development of the practice of architecture,

register of suitably qualified architects within

primarily in the UK but also with worldwide

the UK and entitling them to use the

connections. RIBA is a policy-making body,

description architect. ARB is a registration

involved in the education, qualification and

body for the UK and is not constituted as a

practice of architects, as well as the

policy-making or membership body.

promotion of architecture.
How and when was it set up?

How and when was it set up?

Incorporated by Royal Charter in 1834, with

Created by the Architects Act of 1997, which

a supplementary charter granted in 1971 and

consolidated the original Act of 1931

a schedule of bylaws last amended in 2003.

(amended in 1938, 1993 and 1996). Until

This charter expresses its constitution,

1996 it was known as The Architects

specifying the rights and obligations of its

Registration Council of the United Kingdom

membership.

(ARCUK).

What does it do?

What does it do?

The purpose of the RIBA is simply stated in

The purpose of the ARB is clearly stated in

its charter as the advancement of

the Architects Registration Act and requires

architecture and the promotion of the

the ARB to maintain and publish annually a

acquirement of the knowledge of the arts

register of architects in the UK, who are

and science connected therewith. The

suitably qualified and have paid the required

charter grants the RIBA the power to set the

fee. The ARB oversees the ban on the use of

qualification requirements and to confer the

the description architect in the UK by

professional status of chartered

anyone other than those contained in the

membership for the profession. The RIBA

register. The Act protects the title of

also receives and applies endowments for

architect and not the function. The

Issued as a section of the RIBA Journal by the practice department RIBA 2004. Neither the RIBA nor the contributors accept any responsibility
for the views expressed in this section. In case of doubt, members should seek their own professional advice.

These pages a re edited by Vicky Richa rdson.

Email vicky@foundling.net

prizes, exhibitions, and scholarships for

the promotion of architecture. The RIBA has

functions of an architect in the UK are not

Issue 1
2 January
February2004
2003

New from RIBA bookshops

restricted to only those on the register.

a series of member sub-committees,

The Building Regulations: Explained and

regional offices and departments forming

Illustrated. Twelfth Edition

and implementing policy on different aspects

M J Billington, M W Simons and J R Waters

of the profession (ie practice, education,

Blackwell Publishing

etc). It liaises with, and lobbies, the

Code 01219 Pb 39.95 + p&p 920 pages

construction industry and government on

This new edition has been substantially

these issues. It also provides membership

revised and expanded to take account of

services such as the library, information line,

major changes to the regulations on energy

technical advice, CPD courses, the RIBA

conservation (Part L), sound (Part E) and fire

Journal, email bulletins, RIBANet and

(Part B). It also includes revisions to Part H

regional forums.

on drainage and waste disposal and Part J

on heat producing appliances.

How is it governed?

How is it governed?

Self-governed by an elected council of up to

The ARB and its workings are governed by

Architects Fees: A Survey of the Fees

65 members who are responsible for setting

Schedule 1 of the Act, which can be

Charged by Private Architectural Practices

and revising the regulations, code, bylaws

changed by order of the Secretary of State

Mirza & Nacey Research

and policies for fulfilling the charter.

after consultation. The board elects its

Code 34861 Pb 125 + p&p 44 pages

chairman and appoints the registrar.

The statistics in this book are based on an

data from exclusive research surveys,

Who are its members?

Who are its members?

carefully analysed and presented to be of

RIBA membership is international and

The ARB is not a membership organisation.

immediate and practical help to practices.

divided into two categories of chartered (ie

It is a registration board. Its membership is

qualified architects) and non-chartered

restricted to the 15 members of the board.

rates) and charts (fees). Average hourly

(students, affiliates, honorary fellows etc).

The board consists of eight lay members

rates data includes medians, lower and

Chartered members have to be suitably

who are appointed by the Privy Council (as

upper quartiles, for a variety of staff

qualified, comply with the RIBA code of

representatives of users of architectural

categories, analysed by region and size of

professional conduct and carry out CPD.

services and the general public) and seven

practice. Each fees chart plots construction

This entitles them to call themselves

architect members elected from and by the

cost against percentage fee and shows an

chartered architects and use the

registrants. There are about 30,000

average fee line, which is a line of best fit

professional affix RIBA.There are about

registered architects who are registrants (not

based on an analysis of the raw survey data.

31,000 RIBA members, about 28,000 of

members) of the ARB.

whom are chartered.

Information is presented as tables (hourly

The above titles are available to order from

www.ribabookshops.com or via our mail

What qualifications do you need to become

What qualifications do you need to be on

order department on 0207 256 7222,

a chartered member of the RIBA?

the ARB register?

fax 0207 374 2737

The qualification is to have undertaken

The board prescribes the qualifications and

course of study and passed examinations

practical experience which entitle a person to

Free publications

which have been prescribed or recognised

be on the register, following consultation with

RIBA Bookshops Magazine Edition 2 2003

by Council. (Commonly known as Parts 1, 2

the RIBA and other professional and

Fully illustrated with special offers and

and 3 of RIBA Courses and Examinations in

educational bodies. (RIBA qualifications have

specially commissioned reviews, the

Architecture).

been historically accepted as the required

magazine highlights the latest titles in

professional standard and joint ARB/RIBA

architecture, design and construction.

validation panels have controlled the

accredited courses.)

RIBA Enterprises Publishing Catalogue 2003

The full catalogue of RIBA Enterprises titles

Why do you join?

Why do you register?

ranging from practice management to

Membership is voluntary. Members join

Registration is voluntary. The main reason

specialist design and legal issues.

because they wish to support the work the

for registering is to acquire immunity from

RIBA does in promoting architecture and

prosecution under the Act for use of the title

To order the magazine or catalogue contact

enjoy the facilities and support services for

architect.

marketing@ribabooks.com or tel 0207 256

members.

7222 www.ribabookshops.com

Issued as a section of the RIBA Journal by the practice department RIBA 2004. Neither the RIBA nor the contributors accept any responsibility
for the views expressed in this section. In case of doubt, members should seek their own professional advice.

Issue 1 January 2004

CPD events

Can it form alliances/regional offices?

Can it form alliances/regional offices?

RIBA can establish branches, regional

ARB has no need for alliances or

South East region, tel 01892 515878,

organisations and subsidiary bodies, and

associations. It is unlike other architectural

email info@ribasoutheast.org

enter into alliances and associations with

registration bodies in Europe, which are

architectural or kindred societies, whose

often combined with the national

CDM and all that

activities are of interest to the profession,

professional institute (ie equivalent to the

22 January, 4pm

both in the UK and Internationally.

RIBA) and/or also control the functions of

Le Meridien Hotel, Gatwick

an architect.

Fee: 70 before 8 January, 80 thereafter

The legislation creating ARCUK and later the

duplicating some of the functions of the RIBA.

Eastern region

ARB does not give (and was never intended to

The ARB registration fees have increased

Tel 01223 461458, fax 01223 331701,

give) the Registration Board the character or

significantly, largely as a result of these

email pb210@cam.ac.uk for bookings,

functions of a professional body. Some RIBA

additional activities.

website cpd4architects-east.co.uk

members feel that recent activities and

While the RIBA is determined to maintain a

decisions of the ARB are beyond its remit as a

constructive dialogue, the ARB is now carrying

Construction law and liability update

registration body under the Architects

out an unwarranted amount of its activities

15 January, 1.15-5pm

Registration Act. The term regulation is not

privately without effective consultation with the

New Hall, Huntingdon Road, Cambridge

included in the Act, but the ARB has now taken

relevant professional bodies. It cannot be in

Speaker: Professor Anthony Lavers of the

on itself the role of regulating body and is

the public interest.

London office of US law firm White & Case

Fee: 55, 43 (CPD subscribers)

Legal
Update on the Disabilities
Discrimination Act
29 January, 1.15 - 5pm
New Hall, Huntingdon Road, Cambridge
Speaker: John Miller, John Miller Partnership
Fee: 55, 43 (CPD subscribers)
Architecture and its ethical dilemmas
Two-day conference

Copy wrongs
Michael Horn on
changes to the
copyright laws

Consequently, copying carried out in relation

to a study specifically commissioned by a
client, or study carried out specifically to help
develop other client-requested deliverables,
would not fall within this exception. It is
arguable that study carried out by an individual
as part of their personal professional
development and not linked to specific client

22-23 March

Photocopying, scanning and manual copying

work should constitute private study. However,

New Hall College, Cambridge

are all affected by the Copyright and Related

care must be taken as the legal parameters are

Speakers: Nicholas Ray, Onora ONeill,

Rights Regulations 2003. Insubstantial amounts

not clear and the argument may well fail if the

Neil Leach, Julian Roberts, Tom Spector,

of a work can be copied without breaching

copying was undertaken as part of a

Richard Hill, Sjoerd Soeters, Andrew Saint,

copyright. What is or is not substantial is

systematic scheme of copying and distribution

Sir Michael Latham, David Adamson,

assessed qualitatively rather than quantitatively,

of materials to a firms employees.

Jane Collier, Giles Oliver, Andrew Ballantyne

so each instance will have to be assessed. In

Before the introduction of the regulations, fair

most cases, taking a single copy of a page from

copying for commercial research purposes

a book or a paragraph from an article in a

was permitted. Now the fair dealing exception

journal should not raise major concern.

only extends to research for non-commercial

purposes (whether the enterprise carrying out

Copyright exceptions

the copying is commercial or otherwise). Any

More substantial copying is permissible if it

such copying will also need to be accompanied

falls within specific copyright exceptions. This

by an appropriate acknowledgement of the

article focuses on the exceptions that permit

source, save where this is impossible for

fair copying for private study or research

reasons of practicality or otherwise.

purposes, although there are several other

exceptions including those relating to teaching

Non-commercial purposes

and reporting current affairs.

The regulations do not define a non-

The regulations reinforce the position that the

commercial purpose and it is likely to be left to

exception of private study is very limited. It will

the courts to decide. In the meantime, a

only apply to activity which is neither directly

common-sense interpretation should be used.

nor indirectly linked to a commercial purpose.

Most research carried out by a business

Issued as a section of the RIBA Journal by the practice department RIBA 2004. Neither the RIBA nor the contributors accept any responsibility
for the views expressed in this section. In case of doubt, members should seek their own professional advice.

These pages a re edited by Vicky Richa rdson.

Email vicky@foundling.net

conducted for profit will not qualify for the

exception.
Fair dealing requirement
Not only is it necessary for the copying to fall
within the scope of private study or noncommercial research, the degree of copying
must also be fair.
This assessment of fairness will depend on
the circumstances but requires consideration
of the purpose of the copying, its extent and
the potential prejudice to the interests of the
copyright holder. Copying entire works or
making multiple copies of extracts will rarely be

IT in the office

Untapped
resource
Bhzad Sidawi on
managing project
information
online

Issue 1 January 2004

these stages, internet use was classified into:

acquisition of project information: what
internet information was used, viewed and
downloaded by practices;
co-ordination of project information: how
project information was co-ordinated with
outside parties including clients, the design
and construction teams, and occupants;
presentation of project information: how
project information was presented to the public
through a home website, and how feedback
from this was handled.
Acquisition of project information

fair, particularly where it was possible to

The internet provides a wide variety of tools for

Fewer than 10 of the 60 practices said they

commercially obtain permission to carry out

architects to use in managing project

were using the internet for the following

such copying. Organisations including the

information online. Research carried out at the

purposes:

Chartered Institute of Library and Information

Welsh School of Architecture at Cardiff

Professionals advise that fair copying should

University examines the use made of these

not exceed one article from a journal or one

tools by architectural practices in the UK.

chapter or 5% of a book, but these are only

A sample of 60 practices was surveyed by

guidelines and compliance is not a guaranteed

questionnaire in the year 1999-2000, and

defence to a claim for breach of copyright.

principals from a further 21 practices were

subsequently interviewed. The results were

accessing video pictures of remote

construction sites;
downloading information for integration with
production drawings and specifications;
viewing remote drawings from other project
team members.
The only high rate of use was for technical

If the exceptions do not apply

analysed using simple correlation tests to seek

and manufacturers information, used by 36 of

Licences or consents to copy will need to be

explanatory factors. Also, project management

the practices during the technical stage of

sought from agencies such as the Copyright

tools available on the web were reviewed in

design. In other words, the internet was

Licensing Agency (CLA) for journals and books,

2001-2002 and the home websites of

serving the same function as a more traditional

the Newspaper Licensing Agency (NLA), or

architectural practices surveyed in the years

technical library, while its more interactive

from the copyright holders themselves.

2000 and 2003.

potential was not receiving widespread

While the licences offered by the CLA and

Earlier surveys by RIBA and Barbour chart a

adoption.

NLA still only permit limited copying, it is for

rise over recent years in the number of

both commercial and non-commercial

practices with access to the internet. The

was unpopular among practices, which were

purposes. For more information, visit

period of the present survey marks a significant

hampered by the slow and unfocused search

www.cla.co.uk and www.nla.co.uk

phase by which most practices had become

facilities. Their awareness of where to find

connected.

information affected their ability to find it

CLAs annual licence fee for larger companies

in the professional services category is 19.12

Nevertheless, although their younger

Use of the internet to get project information

quickly and efficiently.

per professional employee, while for the

members would have grown up using the

smallest class of business (1-10 employees)

internet, many of these practices had had

Exchange and sharing of project information

there is a flat annual fee of 95.

only a short time in which to adapt their

Eighteen of the 60 practices said they used the

working procedures to the potential on offer. It

internet to exchange contract documents with

Best practice

follows that one can expect this to be a

co-professionals. Fewer than 10 said they used

Many businesses incorrectly relied upon the

transitional period.

the internet to discuss design sketches or to

research-related copyright exception. The

The most frequent use practices made of the

deliver contract documents to site. Only one

regulations have largely removed the scope for

internet was to access the world wide web and

had an extranet to share information with

such reliance and prevent a liberal

to communicate by email, a pattern familiar in

partners in business.

interpretation of the private study exception.

any place the internet has penetrated. Much

To avoid liability, it is now more important than

ever to assess copying requirements, avoid
unnecessary copying and ensure that
appropriate licences and consents are in place.

None had provision for post-occupancy

less use was found of more specialised project

feedback. In short, co-ordinated exchange of

management software.

project documents between members of the

The study proposed a model to assist in the

discussion of how practices manage project
information through the internet. The project

team, including clients and occupants, was far

from being accepted practice.
Practices were constrained by the absence of

Michael Horn is a solicitor at Masons

life cycle was divided into three stages: design,

standard formats for files (they were sometimes

(michael.horn@masons.com).

construction and occupancy. Through each of

unable to open files they received) and by the

Issued as a section of the RIBA Journal by the practice department RIBA 2004. Neither the RIBA nor the contributors accept any responsibility
for the views expressed in this section. In case of doubt, members should seek their own professional advice.

Issue 1 January 2004

lack of an agreed procedure and supporting

database for the exchange.

e-business (services which help a practice to

branches of the building industry in the UK or to

conduct its business completely online, starting

compete with more advanced practices

with the initial contact with the client and

nationally and globally.

Presentation

ending with the delivery of the product, and to

Of the practices surveyed, 23 had a home

provide clients with a quick response that

The research for this article was carried out

website, which they used to present

addresses individual needs).

by Bhzad Sidawi at the Welsh School of

information about their completed projects.

Practices must adapt in various ways to

Architecture in Cardiff. For more details

Seven of them presented information about

accommodate this potential. The study found

email sidawib1@cf.ac.uk, or Dr Mike

project feasibility studies. None of them

some obvious handicaps, which will be

Fedeski, email fedeski@cf.ac.uk

presented technical design information about

overcome with time, such as limited knowledge

their projects or their practices investigations.

of what is available and where it can be found;

Only three websites gave visitors the

difficulties experienced in past exposure to the

opportunity to enter their comments on the

technology; and even reluctance to consider

sites. None were customised to invite feedback

new ways of working.

on the practices work, whether completed

projects or feasibility studies.

For the internet to have a major impact,

practices need to take a systematic approach

This suggests that the public, including

to its adoption. They need to examine how

CPD

Joni Tyler
explains the
changes in CPD
monitoring

potential new clients, was the main audience

these tools fit the way they operate, and

addressed, and that promotion of the practices

whether it is feasible to tailor them to their own

reputation was the leading objective. The

needs. Piecemeal adoption of occasional tools

potential for feedback from the public and

will not be enough. The decisions to be taken

The RIBAs Professional Services Board has

building users was under-exploited.

are not independent, and can have wider

agreed to transfer the onus for monitoring

implications for a practice that chooses to take

continuing professional development (CPD)

full advantage of what can be done.

compliance from RIBA registered practices to

Some practices used primitive and nonstandard presentation techniques, indicating

that a greater awareness of the techniques

The type of project that a practice is

individual chartered members, from 1 January.

available could have improved what was

undertaking (whether using a traditional

sometimes a very poor quality of presentation.

contract or design and build) affects the way

in accordance with RIBA bylaw (2.8a). In the

Undertaking CPD is a members responsibility

information is exchanged. It consequently

past, those monitored have been selected from

Project management

affects the choice of appropriate internet tools,

all UK registered practices. However from 1

As the internet becomes a more familiar

implying that a specific strategy needs to be

January, the selection will be made from all UK

feature in practices, some of its potential for

formulated at the outset of each project. A

registered members.

handling information interactively will be better

practice must choose whether to work with

exploited. The tasks it can perform will

project management tools hired online or

of software that allows maintenance and

develop, driven by demand. But some useful

manage projects from its own home page and

monitoring of CPD compliance online. This

tools that have already evolved are still waiting

internal network. If information is to be

software is scheduled for launch on 1 April. All

to be embraced by UK architects.

exchanged with project partners outside the

CPD monitoring will be done online by 2009.

The internet can assist not only in exchanging

practice, attention may need to be given to

This change coincides with the development

The software will allow you to plan your

project information but in managing projects

integrating separate network and database

development and lifelong learning much more

from inception to completion. Tools already

systems. Project management tools should fit a

effectively, enhancing your jobs, careers,

available online can bring benefit to:

management model that all the partners agree

businesses, staff development, client relations

upon. Online tools may impose their own

and profession. It will also allow the RIBA to

access secure, dating and notifying changes,

information management models on the team.

plan CPD programmes much more effectively

identifying inconsistencies in updates,

For example, an information-centric

and target resources better.

archiving);

management model requires project

sharing documents (tracking access, making

co-ordinating the team (authenticating team

The new online software system will be

information to be saved in a central reservoir

accessible from the members only area of the

members, synchronising team meetings,

which is accessed and shared by all project

RIBAs website at www.riba.org from April.

auditing transactions, recording

team members.

Before the launch, there will be clear

conversations);

This technology needs to be well managed by

progressing the project (support for

architectural practices, in association with other

instructions and FAQs published within these

RIBA Journal Practice pages.

preparing specifications, schedules, meeting

parties with whom they work, if it is to deliver its

minutes, programmes and project updates, and

full potential. Practices that do this will benefit.

system before it goes live. If you are interested

Members are invited to volunteer to test the

for recording novel procedures for use on

Those that drag their feet risk becoming

in taking part in this beta testing, email

future projects);

progressively unable to communicate with other

joni.tyler@inst.riba.org

Issued as a section of the RIBA Journal by the practice department RIBA 2004. Neither the RIBA nor the contributors accept any responsibility
for the views expressed in this section. In case of doubt, members should seek their own professional advice.

These pages are edited by Vicky Richardson.

If you would like to make any comments please email vickyrichardson@inst.riba .org
RIBA, 66 Portland Place, London W1B 1AD
T +44 20 7580 5533 F +44 20 7255 1541
info@inst.riba.org www.architecture.com

These pages a re edited by Vicky Richa rdson.

Email vicky@foundling.net

Issue 1
2 January
February2004
2003

Principles

Caps and cover

Liability caps in an
architects appointment
arent cut and dried, says
Alistair McGrigor
Professional indemnity insurance cover is

In the Yakeley case, the estimated building

intended to ensure that, should the worst

costs were about 250,000, hence the judge

were relevant in the light of the cap of

happen, a firm of architects will not be made

was able to decide that the cap of 250,000

250,000 which Northern Security Solutions

insolvent by a claim for negligence. Every firm

was acceptable, because it was not arbitrary.

had incorporated into its contract with Britvic.

of architects should have professional

Also significant in allowing the judge to come to

The court agreed with Britvic, stating that

indemnity cover, but the level of that cover is

this decision was the fact that Moores was a

where one party is relying upon an exclusion

often a closely guarded secret of each firm.

very wealthy man, whereas Yakeley Associates

clause limiting liability to a specified sum of

had no assets, and Moores and his solicitor

money, and UCTA 1977 is relied upon, it is the

existence and amount of the insurance cover

had been aware of (and hence approved) the

particular insurance position of the party relying

maintained by a firm of architects becomes

clause incorporating the cap at 250,000.

on the cap which is relevant and disclosable,

relevant to the issue of liability of that firm.

The key legislation obliging the judge in

However, there may be situations where the

of cover under that public liability insurance

not merely whether the party relying on the cap

Primarily, this situation arises where limitations

Moores v Yakeley Associates to look at the

has insurance generally available to it in the

on liability are being incorporated into an

insurance position of the party relying on the

insurance market.

appointment, capping the liability of the firm of

cap on liability is Section 11(4) of the Unfair

architects at a fixed financial sum.

Contract Terms Act 1977. Under UCTA 1977,

a requirement of insurers (both for professional

It is good practice to seek to incorporate

This case is important because it is frequently

limitations on liability need to be reasonable if

indemnity and for public liability insurance) that

these sorts of limits of liability, but what if the

they are to be allowed to take effect. It is for

the terms and cover of those policies are kept

cap set in the appointment is substantially less

this reason that the judge took into

confidential. The Britvic case shows that it may

than the amount of professional indemnity

consideration the level of insurance in

well be possible for a client, unsatisfied with

insurance which the architect carries? Does

assessing the reasonableness of the cap.

the cap on liability in the appointment, to

that make the cap unreasonable?

It was exactly this question that arose in the
case Moores v Yakeley Associates Ltd. The
client Moores had appointed Yakeley
Associates to design a bungalow in Ireland.
The appointment included a cap on liability to
250,000. Yakeley Associates maintained
professional indemnity insurance of 500,000.
It was argued that the cap should have been
set at a sum matching, or at least closer to, the
level of professional indemnity insurance
maintained by Yakeley Associates.
However, the court held that the fact that
insurance cover is in excess of the cap cannot
be determinative as to whether that cap is

Section 11(4) of UCTA 1977 was also at the

centre of the case Britvic Soft Drinks v

A dissatisfied
client could
demand to see
the level of an
architects PII
policy

reasonable or not. The judge pointed out that

demand to see the terms and level of cover of

the professional indemnity policy of the
architects, to show that the cap on liability is
unreasonable in the circumstances.
Contrasting the Moores v Yakeley Associates
case with the Britvic case, a client might
therefore have the right to see an architects
policy, which might reveal that the level of cover
was greatly in excess of the cap on liability
claimed by the architects. However, that cap
could still survive intact, if it can be proved that
it is appropriate for the project (for example if
the cap closely reflects the construction costs).
Nevertheless, it does leave open the door for
caps on liability in appointments to be defeated
if they bear little relationship to the value of the

an architect may have insurance cover of 10m

Northern Security Solutions, again concerning

project and are set far below the professional

but be engaged to carry out a small project with

the relevance of insurance to liability.

indemnity insurance cover of the architects.

an estimated contract value of 10,000. It

Britvic wanted an order for the public liability

would be absurd in such a case to say that any

insurance policy of Northern Security Solutions

Alistair McGrigor is with Macfarlanes Solicitors.

cap lower than 10m would be unreasonable.

to be disclosed. The existence and the amount

He can be contacted on 020 7831 9222.

Issued as a section of the RIBA Journal by the practice department RIBA 2004. Neither the RIBA nor the contributors accept any responsibility
for the views expressed in this section. In case of doubt, members should seek their own professional advice.