Article

"Blindingly obvious"? It is now – Architects don’t ignore the numbers!

 

By Tris Tucker

In a TCC judgment that may have serious ramifications for Architects, Mr Justice Frazer states that there may be a ''positive duty'' imposed upon an Architect to advise on costs and budgeting, even in circumstances where costs advice has been excluded from their retainer. 

Background

Foster + Partners (F+P), the Defendant, was retained to design a revolutionary hotel near Heathrow Airport. Mr Justice Frazer found that F+P were aware of the budget for the build (originally being £70 million, but duly revised to £100 million) notwithstanding that fact the ambitious 600 bedroom hotel (with parts enclosed in a giant glass biosphere) had an estimated build cost of £195 million. Whilst planning permission was obtained, the permission lapsed as funding (understandably) was not secured. Riva (the Claimant) alleged two main breaches (amongst others), which were: 

i) that F+P had failed to establish the budget (of which they were made aware); and 

ii) that F+P erroneously represented that the design could be value-engineered down to fall within budget. 

The judgment

The claimants were awarded in excess of £3.5 million for F+P's breaches in order to compensate for losses incurred in instructing new consultants and designers to produce a new scheme. Even though budget was not an express provision of the agreement, the RIBA appointment imposed an obligation on F+P to ''identify requirements and possible constraints''. Taking this into account, in finding F+P liable, Mr Justice Frazer stated that ''a client's budget for a project is plainly a constraint (it could also be argued to be a requirement too)''.  Judgment was made on the basis that it was ''blindingly obvious'' that the proposal was over budget

The lesson

In a nutshell, Architects cannot ignore costs and, if they do, run the risk of having to compensate clients who then require work to be redesigned to a budget. Quite tellingly, this is the case where the contract did not expressly require costs consideration/budgets.

But in a scathing judgment, Mr Justice Fraser said: “Fosters embarked upon designing the project with no thought or consideration for the budget at all. 
featured image

As a free user, you can follow Passle and like posts.

To repost this post to your own Passle blog, you will need to upgrade your account.

For plans and pricing, please contact our sales team at sales@passle.net

Sorry, you don't have permission to repost or create posts.

Repost successful!

View the repost

Repost successful!

Your repost is currently a draft. Review your repost and request approval.

Something went wrong whilst reposting - please try again.

Sorry - this is not an option. This post already exists in the Passle you have selected.

Try reposting to another Passle.