The appellant architect appealed a decision of the Discipline Committee finding him guilty of professional misconduct for failing to notify a prior architect on three projects and for providing architectural services through an unlicensed entity.
The Divisional Court upheld the findings regarding the failure to notify, concluding the Committee reasonably interpreted the regulation.
However, the Court set aside the finding regarding unlicensed practice, holding the Committee failed to determine whether the drawings at issue constituted a 'design' under the Architects Act.
The matter was remitted to the Committee on that issue.
