Duties to the public

Architects owe duties to their clients when they provide architectural services, including:

• carrying out work competently and with due care;
• acting honestly and professionally;
• communicating clearly;
• protecting confidential information;
• ensuring that all applicable laws are complied with; and
• meeting contractual obligations under the client agreement.

Architects also owe duties to the public, which include:

• protecting the health and safety of the public; and
• where possible, considering:
• environmental impacts;
• considering heritage values;
• considering sustainable resource use; and
• acting consistently with broader community interests where possible.

At times, an architect’s duties to a client may come into conflict with duties to the public.

For example, a client may prefer a design solution that is relatively cheap and quick to build but which creates unacceptable risks for the public – such as when the building is designed in a manner that is unsafe.

In those circumstances, the architects must consider both their duties to the client and to the public, which may involve:

• advising the client against the client’s preferred design solution;
• recommending safer alternatives;
• refusing to endorse non-compliant work; or
• withdrawing from the engagement, if it is impossible to meet duties to the client and to the public.

Under the Code, an architect has responsibility, where possible, to act in the public interest.

The phrase ‘public interest’ is not defined in the Act. However, when read in context, the ordinary meaning is that architects should consider the impacts of their design work on the public.

This does not mean architects must solve every social issue or reject a client’s preferred option because the public may not be content with it. Rather, architects should consider the public interest, where possible, and avoid decisions that unnecessarily harm the community.

Here are some examples of how architects can act in the public interest:

• supporting safe and inclusive access to buildings;
• considering the neighbourhood’s context and culture when designing a building in that neighbourhood;
• advocating design that supports resilience to climate risks;
• committing to ethical project outcomes.

The Code requires architects to take all reasonable steps to protect the health and safety of people when carrying out architectural work.

The public harm that this obligation is seeking to protect against includes:

• injuries or fatalities;
• structural failures;
• fire hazards; and
• water ingress, mould or unhealthy internal environments.

The reasonable steps that architects must take to protect the public’s health and safety will depend upon a range of circumstances, including:

• the size and complexity of the project;
• the architect’s role and scope of services;
• available time and resources to provide the services;
• the type and seriousness of potential harm that could occur; and
• applicable laws that may govern the harm.

The duty does not require perfection or guarantee that no harm will occur. Rather, it requires sensible, proportionate and professional consideration and action by architects.

Under the Code, where possible, an architect has a responsibility to give proper consideration to the natural environment.

Architects are not expected to protect the environment above all else through their designs. However, they should at least consider relevant environmental impacts for the project and advise clients on how environmentally harmful impacts could be addressed.

The natural environment could be taken into account through consideration of:

• the impact of a building design on the landscape, such as the building’s footprint;
• how the natural environment could be used to reduce the need for heating and cooling, such as through building orientation; and
• climate resilience of a building.

Architects have a responsibility under the Code to give proper consideration to conservation of cultural heritage, including Aboriginal cultural heritage, where possible.

To meet this requirement, architects should take steps to:

• identify areas or buildings of cultural significance;
• determine whether the site or building is subject to any heritage controls;
• respect the character of a place or area;
• recognise statutory obligations regarding Aboriginal cultural heritage;
• avoid cultural appropriation.

Where specialist issues arise, architects should seek appropriate expert advice, implement meaningful engagement processes, rather than proceed to provide architectural services without sufficient knowledge or understanding of those issues.

Under the Code, architects have a responsibility to give proper consideration to the conservation of natural resources, where possible.

This requirement may involve consideration of the following:

• adaptive reuse of existing buildings;
• durable design to reduce replacement cycles of building components;
• incorporating water and energy efficiency into designs;
• reducing construction waste through smart design choices;
• selecting building products that use fewer resources, where feasible.

Architects could keep records to demonstrate how they have taken the various dimensions of the public interest into account, including through the advice, options and recommendations provided to clients.