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 use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

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

‘Architects don’t approve drawings’: Studio E associate denies signing off cladding

Comment

From a legal perspective, I would suggest that ‘seek to ensure’ is similar to precatory wording in a will. For example, if you state that you are leaving £1m to your brother in the ‘hope’, ‘wish’ or ‘desire’ that he will take care of your two nieces, the precatory wording will mean that your attempt to set up a trust for your nieces will fail. The sum will become an absolute gift to your brother. By the same, token the phrase ‘seek to ensure’ should fail to create any contractual or other legal obligation or responsibility for meeting the building regulations in the present context. There may be a moral imperative to do that, but the intention required for a legal obligation is not present with such precatory wording. For the separation of legal and moral imperatives refer to the ‘Hart Fuller Debate’. The ‘seek to ensure’ phrase is pure nonsense from a jurisprudence perspective.

Posted date

6 March, 2020

Posted time

9:09 pm

required
required
required
required