RibA also recognizes a standard novation agreement published by the City of London Law Society, but notes that its provisions expose architects/advisers to a greater risk [4]. Unlike the CIC form, the CLLS form is an „ab initio“ principle that assumes that the consultant worked on the contractor retroactively from the beginning of his appointment to the employer. The most immediate changes are presentation; The graphics, format and layout have been thoroughly reviewed. All new versions include a single document consisting of four main parts: contract details, agreement, contractual terms and service schedule, with no separate surcharges. A contract checklist has been added, and the instructions are now simply referenced at the front of the document. This makes all RIBA PSCs more modern, more attractive and easier to use than their predecessors. The CIC itself makes a few other recommendations [6] on the proposed conditions for innovation that a consultant might find:- These issues were highlighted by the 2001 Blyth-Blyth v Carillion case (79 CON LR 142), in which it was found that the contractor did not have his own pre-review duties; he is only the „creditor“ of all the losses that the employer could have suffered as a result of the reckless performance of these pre-renovation obligations. It was considered that, although he may have breached these obligations, the contractor was limited by the amount of damages suffered by the employer, which was only minimal, and not by his [1]. The new feature of the latest RIBA PSCs is also that you can now create, design and print your digital professional service contract. RIBA Contracts Digital has been specially designed to make contract preparation simple and simple. Riba Chartered members receive a welcome 50% discount on all contracts purchased through the digital tool.

For more information, see architecture.com/riba-contracts. If you build your online professional service contract, you can create, modify, manage and display all your contracts in a secure location before you print the final contract. For more information, see: www.ribacontracts.com. More importantly, for the benefit of the architect, the introduction of a new „regulatory clause“ which states that „nothing it contains as an agreement or elsewhere can be interpreted in such a way as to impose a greater obligation on the architect… In practice, higher or stricter standards are sometimes set in other documents, such as the . B of a project contract, and this should help to prevent the architect from being subjected to this higher standard (unlike the results obtained in cases such as Costain v Charles Haswell – Partners (2009) where engineers were strictly held responsible for their construction.) The introduction of innovation provisions is one of the key changes to the RIBA PSC standard.