close [×]

Dear Flixster Community,

After seven fabulous years with you all, we are sorry to let you know that we're going to be retiring the Flixster Community site on September 30, 2014. Please note that you can still access your ratings, reviews, and quizzes on Flixster and Rotten Tomatoes using your same login. We have had so much fun building this community with you.

Thanks for all the memories,
Flixster

Art Forum (Showing 1 - 0 of 0 comments)


  • mercadorealtycon
     

    Architects WIN Anew over Civil Engineers in Court !

    The National President (NP) of the United Architects of the Philippines (UAP), the integrated and accredited professional organization of architects (IAPOA) under R.A. No. 9266 (the Architecture Act of 2004), in the person of Arch. Medeliano Roldan, Jr., fuap, apec ar, informed the PRBoA on 23 June 2009 (Tuesday), that the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Manila Branch 22 (the "Court") has already ruled on the March 2008 Motion for Reconsideration (MR) filed by the Phil. Inst. of Civil Engrs. (PICE) in its 2005 civil case vs. the Dept. of Public Works & Highways (DPWH) Sec. Hermogenes Ebdane, where the UAP-IAPOA is the Intervenor.

    The Court's ruling AFFIRMED its 29 January 2008 Order LIFTING/ DISSOLVING the May 2005 INJUNCTION it issued against Secs. 302.3 & 4* of the 2004 Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1096, otherwise known as the 1977 National Building Code of the Philippines (NBCP). The said sections LIMIT the SIGNING and SEALING of ARCHITECTURAL DOCUMENTS only to Registered and Licensed Architects (RLAs).

    * Very Important Note: In 2004, the said sections were FULLY HARMONIZED by the DPWH with the multiple sections of R.A. No. 9266 that LIMIT the preparation, signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents only to RLAs.

    These ARCHITECTURAL DOCUMENTS encompass perspectives, floor/ ceiling/ roof plans, sections, elevations, details, architectural specifications and estimates, architectural contract/ tender documents and architectural reports. These ARCHITECTURAL DOCUMENTS require the academic, sub-professional and professional (post-licensure) training, aptitude and competence of registered and licensed architects (RLAs). As such, NO other state-regulated professional can now lay claim to parallel expertise in the preparation of ARCHITECTURAL DOCUMENTS as the Court has clearly established that such is the EXCLUSIVE domain of RLAs.

    The Court's recently released ruling also AFFIRMED its 29 January 2008 DECISION DISMISSING the 2005 PICE petition against the DPWH Secretary.

    The foregoing can only mean one thing - THAT THE DPWH AND ITS INSTRUMENTALITIES, PARTICULARLY THE OFFICES OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL (OBOs) OF ALL LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNITS (LGUs) NATIONWIDE, ARE NOW MANDATED TO FULLY IMPLEMENT AND ENFORCE SECS. 302. 3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 (NBCP).

    The DPWH MUST NOW ISSUE ITS MEMORANDUM TO ALL BUILDING OFFICIALS (BOs) OF ALL LGUs NATIONWIDE TO FULLY IMPLEMENT AND ENFORCE THE SAID PROVISIONS. Henceforth, only the signatures and dry seals of RLAs MUST appear on ALL ARCHITECTURAL DOCUMENTS forming part of building permit applications.

    ALL Violators from the PUBLIC and PRIVATE sectors may henceforth be held accountable under the appropriate laws, including P.D. 1096, R.A. No. 9266 (The Architecture Act of 2004) and anti-graft laws, including the Code of Conduct for Public Officials and their respective IRRs. The private sector is also warned that graft (and/or corruption) charges may also be filed against private individuals who materially benefit from the acts of public officials that violate the law.

    The certified true copy of the Court ruling, posted at www.united-architects.org of UAP website, and is also posted at the Latest Publications section of www.architectureboard.ph website.
    posted 4 years ago