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

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

Astragal: Ping-pong with Boris Johnson – another empty Garden Bridge promise

Comment

"The body came to a swift decision and, with uncharacteristic breeziness, replied on Twitter: ‘You may be interested to know that if the title “architect” isn’t used in the course of business or practice, it is unlikely to be a breach of the law.’ Carry on, professor! " What if somebody who isn't an Architect claims to be one in general conversation? They haven't actually claimed to be an Architect in the course of business or practice but because of their claim someone might rely on what is said as being advice from an Architect. By the ARB's definition they aren't committing any offence? From the perspective of the injured party the title of Architect is a pointless waste of time as anybody can and does use it. What exactly is the point of the ARB and why exactly am I paying for it?

Posted date

27 February, 2019

Posted time

1:59 pm

required
required
required
required

Job of the week

AJ Jobs