Read time: 4 minutes
In the design and construction of buildings, architects will often require the services of specialist consultants A consultant who is a specialist in a particular field. Such consultants contribute to parts of the design but generally not the whole design. When engaged, the specialist consultant will become either a secondary consultant or a subconsultant. View full glossary to provide input through all phases of the project life-cycle, and to navigate the complex set of regulations that determines the framework within which a building is developed.
Specialist consultants can be engaged as subconsultants A consultant whose work is subject to the direction and coordination of the primary consultant. The subconsultant is in contract with the primary consultant. View full glossary (directly engaged by the lead consultant) or as secondary consultants A consultant whose work is subject to the direction and coordination of the primary consultant. The secondary consultant is in contract with the client. View full glossary (engaged directly by the client).
Page contents:
Advantages and disadvantages
Some clients prefer to engage a principal consultant, usually the architect, who is responsible for the design team, both financially and technically. For instance, government and small inexperienced clients typically expect to engage a team to design and deliver their building project through a single contract which includes all specialist consultants as subconsultants to the architect. This is particularly true where the owner is inexperienced as it simplifies their administrative workload and provides them with a clear line of responsibility and communication throughout the design and construction process. An exception may be where the client separately engages a quantity surveyor (QS) due to the desire to have direct and unrestricted access to the advice provided by the QS. Whereas large institutional or experienced clients may engage all specialist consultants directly as secondary consultants, often with the support of a project manager.
Oversight and direct management of the design team
The major advantage to the architect of engaging specialist consultants as subconsultants is that it strengthens the architect's lead role in the design process, giving greater directorial capabilities to meet the architect’s desired level of service. Where an architect selects, engages and pays the specialist consultants, there can be no doubt as to who is leading the design team. Further, any problems that occur during the design and construction process might be more readily resolved through one central point of direction. Where there is an ongoing relationship between the architect and the specialist consultants, there are the benefits of familiarity with each other’s work and an incentive to ensure that a good working relationship is maintained. Fees can be structured and refined to reflect the roles of specialist consultants and the scope of their work and disputes might be more rapidly managed without the involvement of the client.
Liability for the specialist consultant
If a problem develops as a result of the actions of a specialist consultant, the architect may share some of the liability. In addition, many clients look to the architect to review and coordinate the work of specialist consultants and as a result, assume that the architect has some responsibility for the specialist consultant's work. Refer Acumen note Architect's liability for specialist consultants.
Liability for the services of the specialist consultant will align according to the distribution of responsibilities within each contract. Engagement of secondary consultants does not defer the principal consultant’s requirements to coordinate the services as outlined within each respective contract.
Specialist consultant fees
An architect who directly engages specialist consultants as subconsultants will be responsible for the payment of the specialist consultant’s fees, even if the client does not meet their own obligations to the pay the architectural fees which include the specialist consultant’s fees. When specialist consultants are engaged directly by the client then the client remains responsible for direct payment of the consultant’s fees. Refer Acumen note Specialist consultants – payment.
Bankruptcy of specialist consultants
Specialist consultants may occasionally experience financial difficulties and, if they cease to trade, may leave the architect liable if they are subconsultants to the architect, including the cost of engaging other specialist consultants to complete the work. When specialist consultants are engaged directly by the client the architect will not be liable for the arrangement of an alternative and will likely be in a position to seek a variation for increased engagement and abortive works associated with changing consultants.
Professional indemnity insurance implications
Proof of adequate professional indemnity insurance cover and the requirement to provide regular certificates of currency should be clearly defined in the specialist consultants’ conditions of engagement. When engaging subconsultants, the architect should diligently seek evidence of the adequacy of the specialist consultant’s insurance. When engaged as secondary consultants, this responsibility lies with the client. However, the architect should advise their client of the need to check the specialist consultant’s insurances.
Administrative costs
The engagement and payment of specialist consultants involves administrative costs that the architect would not incur if the specialist consultant was engaged directly by the owner. The processing of invoices, insurances, management of agreements and contracts take time and the architect should advise the client in advance if such management overheads are included or excluded from the architectural fees.
Consultancy Service Agreements
A consultancy services agreement (CSA) shall be signed by the specialist consultant regardless of who engages them. The Institute's Architect–Specialist Consultant Agreement (ASCA2017) is intended for use where the architect directly engages the specialist consultant and pays the specialist consultant directly. When engaged as a subconsultant to the architect it is essential that the terms of the CSA are ‘back-to-back’ with that of the architect’s services agreement so that they are held to the same standard and requirements as the architect.
Summary
It is appropriate for the architect to consider the areas of risks likely to be experienced on a given project and advise the client on which specialist consultant engagement methodology would be best and detail the reasons for this selection based on the information available at the time (refer to Acumen Guide letter 6, Guide letter 7 and Guide letter 8).
Resources
Disclaimer
This content is provided by the Australian Institute of Architects for reference purposes and as general guidance. It does not take into account specific circumstances and should not be relied on in that way. It is not legal, financial, insurance, or other advice and you should seek independent verification or advice before relying on this content in circumstances where loss or damage may result. The Institute endeavours to publish content that is accurate at the time it is published, but does not accept responsibility for content that may or has become inaccurate over time. Using this website and content is subject to the Acumen User Licence.