Architect Liability in Fire Safety: Why Cladding Decisions Can Define Your Career
- Whelan Lawyers
- Sep 21
- 4 min read
Updated: Sep 21
As an architect, every specification you make carries professional and legal weight that extends far beyond the drawing board. In Australia's increasingly litigious construction environment, material choices, particularly those involving building facades, have become career-defining decisions that can expose practices to devastating liability claims.
The sobering reality is that architects are being held directly accountable for fire safety failures, even when working within collaborative design teams. Tribunal decisions over the last decade have shattered the misconception that liability can be deflected to other consultants or contractors. Your professional indemnity insurance premiums reflect this shift, and exclusions for cladding-related claims signal insurers' recognition of the elevated risk.
This article examines how architectural liability has evolved in the wake of high-profile facade fires, why traditional risk allocation strategies are failing, and what contemporary practice must embrace to protect both public safety and professional survival.
Why Fire Safety & Architects Liability Matters More Than Ever
The construction industry's relationship with combustible cladding represents a watershed moment for architectural liability. What began as isolated building failures has evolved into systematic legal accountability that reaches directly into architectural practices.
Modern tribunal decisions consistently reject attempts by architects to delegate fire safety responsibility to fire engineers, building surveyors, or contractors. Courts now expect each professional to maintain independent oversight of their domain, creating a legal environment where collaborative design processes must be balanced against individual professional accountability.
The commercial implications extend beyond legal fees. Professional indemnity insurers have fundamentally reassessed cladding-related risk, with many policies now excluding facade fire claims entirely. For practices that cannot obtain adequate coverage, this represents an existential threat to business continuity.
Key Legal Points to Understand
Specification Creates Direct Liability
When architects specify building materials, whether through detailed schedules or performance criteria, they assume direct responsibility for compliance and safety outcomes. Courts have ruled that specification, regardless of how it's framed, creates a duty of care that cannot be contracted away or delegated to other consultants.
The landmark Lacrosse Tower case exemplifies this principle. In Owners Corporation No 1 of PS613436T v LU Simon Builders Pty Ltd, VCAT found Elenberg Fraser 25% liable for the 2014 facade fire, despite the collaborative design process involving multiple consultants. The Tribunal determined that the architectural firm had specified combustible cladding without ensuring compliance with fire safety standards and had failed to properly assess the material's fire performance. Crucially, the court rejected arguments that fire engineers and building surveyors were solely responsible for identifying compliance issues.
Performance Solutions Increase Exposure
Alternative solutions and performance-based specifications, while valuable design tools, significantly increase legal exposure. These approaches place greater responsibility on architects to verify compliance and safety outcomes, as they move beyond prescriptive building code requirements into areas requiring professional judgment and verification.
Documentation Becomes Evidence
Design documentation serves as primary evidence in liability proceedings. Drawings, specifications, and correspondence that suggest material choices or approve alternatives can establish legal responsibility, even when architects believe they were providing guidance rather than definitive instruction.
Practical Guidance for Contemporary Architectural Practice
Implement Rigorous Material Verification
Establish internal protocols that require independent verification of all facade materials, particularly where fire performance is critical. This means conducting your own compliance assessment rather than relying solely on manufacturer claims or consultant advice.
Develop relationships with materials testing laboratories and maintain current knowledge of building code interpretations. When specifying performance solutions, ensure you have documented evidence supporting compliance claims.
Formalise Design Review Processes
Create systematic design review stages that specifically address fire safety implications. These reviews should involve senior architects who can identify potential compliance issues before they become embedded in project documentation.
Document these reviews thoroughly, as they demonstrate professional diligence and can provide important evidence of appropriate care in specification decisions.
Clarify Consultant Responsibilities
While you cannot delegate your professional responsibilities, you can ensure other consultants understand their roles in fire safety verification. Develop clear scopes of work that specify who is responsible for what aspects of fire compliance assessment.
Avoid assumptions about what other consultants will check or approve. If fire safety depends on specific material properties, ensure the relevant consultant has explicitly confirmed compliance in writing.
How We Can Help
Whelan Lawyers works extensively with architectural practices to navigate the complex liability landscape surrounding building design and specification. We understand the commercial pressures architects face and the professional standards expected in contemporary practice.
Our approach combines deep construction law expertise with practical understanding of design processes. We help architects develop risk management strategies that protect their practices while maintaining design flexibility and professional collaboration.
Whether you're facing a specific compliance question, need contract advice, or require support in a liability dispute, our team provides strategic guidance tailored to architectural practice realities.
Don't let specification decisions become career-limiting moves. Contact our construction law team today for advice that protects both your professional interests and design ambitions.
Frequently Asked Questions
Question: Can I rely on my fire engineer to confirm facade material compliance?
Answer: While fire engineers provide valuable expertise, courts expect architects to maintain independent oversight of their specifications. You should verify material compliance yourself rather than assuming others will identify and correct potential issues.
Question: Does professional indemnity insurance cover cladding-related claims?
Answer: Many current policies exclude cladding-related claims or provide limited coverage. Review your policy carefully and consider whether additional coverage or risk management measures are necessary to protect your practice.
Question: How can I specify materials safely without limiting design options?
Answer: Focus on thorough verification processes rather than avoiding certain materials entirely. Ensure you have documented evidence supporting any performance claims and maintain clear records of your compliance assessment process.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information only and is not legal advice. The law is complex and varies based on individual circumstances. You should seek specific legal advice about your particular situation before making any decisions about legal matters.
