Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

ARB owes Ingrid Morris a public apology

  • Comment

The recent case of Ingrid Morris gives the profession more cause for concern about the manner in which the arb conducts its affairs. Whatever the history may have been, there was no justification for the arb to disclose details of the referral before the Professional Conduct Committee decided its verdict.

In the matter of publicity, the Architects Act 1997 (Part III, 'Discipline') sets out a logical framework and sequence of actions for this part of the regulatory machinery.

Section 15 paragraph (4) states that 'the pcc shall, at appropriate intervals and in such a manner as it considers appropriate, publish: a) The names of persons whom it has found guilty of ... '.

The arb has ignored not only the Act but also the basic rights of all individuals in this country to be innocent before proven guilty. Although the case was dismissed, the real damage to Morris as an individual and as an architect is that she remains tainted through a lack of consideration by a statutory body that is supposed to be even-handed.

A public apology is the minimum one should expect and I shall look out for it.

Peter Melvin, Aldbury

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.