RIBA Standard Agreements 2007

The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) has recently updated its Standard Agreements, in light of statutory and legal changes, to publish the RIBA Agreements 2007. The suite includes a choice of agreements for the appointment of an Architect and the appointment of a Consultant.

According to RIBA, the Agreements are intended to offer a flexible system that can be customised to suit the needs of the particular project. Flexibility is brought about by the “modular” presentation of the Agreements, consisting of nine component documents for Architects. The forms also come in electronic format.

What’s new?

• The Standard Conditions of Appointment of an Architect have not changed that much compared with their predecessor, despite the 1999 conditions receiving heavy criticism from the courts and commentators for being biased in favour of the Architect. (For criticism of the RIBA standard terms of appointment, see Picardi v Cuniberti).

• Two particular issues have been addressed:

- the clause requiring the Client to pay the Architect’s legal costs (in the event of a dispute) on an indemnity basis has been removed; and

- the rate of interest for late payments has been lowered from 8% to 5% over the base rate.

• Duty of skill and care. The main duty of skill and care to be exercised by the Architect is broadly acceptable, but it goes on to contain an obligation on the Architect to perform the Services “so far as reasonably practicable” in accordance with the Brief and timescales or cost limits agreed with the Client. This could come back to bite the Client when, as often happens, the project is in delay and over budget. The Architect might just turn around and say that timescales or cost limits were not reasonably practicable to keep to.

• Informational needs. As with the previous form, information necessary for the proper and timely performance of the services is to be provided by the Client free of charge. An onerous change to this clause is that the Architect is entitled to rely on this information, an obligation the Client probably will not want to agree to, particularly as information is likely to have been prepared by someone else.

• Copyright licence. The copyright licence is subject to the payment of fees, which could lead to uncertainty as to whether a licence is in place if disputes arise. Clients will also not like the widely drafted net contribution clause and the cap on liability although such clauses are becoming increasingly commonplace in the market and might be acceptable to a client depending on the project.

• Collateral warranty / third party rights. The new conditions provide that a collateral warranty or a Third Party Rights Schedule may be provided in favour of funders, purchasers or tenants and, on a positive note, whilst there have been minor changes to the services, they remain largely unchanged from the services contained in the 1999 conditions.

Conclusion

The new RIBA suite is architect (and consultant) friendly. For some construction clients this may not be a concern. But it seems likely that others will prefer to use bespoke forms of appointment, or perhaps amended versions of the new RIBA forms.