Professional Conduct Committee Decisions

ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD

PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE

IN THE MATTER OF

CLIVE WILLE (046624G)

held on

Monday, 26th July 2010

at
H.M.P. Highdown
Sutton Lane
Sutton
SM2 5PJ

Present:

Angela Deacon (Chair)
Christine Mogridge
Donal Hutchinson

Mr Iain Miller of Bevan Brittan appeared on behalf of the Board
Mr Clive Wille appeared in person
Mr Stephen Battersby appeared as Clerk to the Committee

DECISION

THE CHAIR: The Board was represented by Iain Miller. Clive Wille attended but was not represented.

Mr. Wille faced an allegation that on 19 October 2009 and 22 October 2009 at the Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey, London he was convicted upon indictment of offences other than offences which have no material relevance to his fitness to practise as an architect in that he was found guilty of threatening to kill and attempted murder.

On 19 October 2009 he admitted and was convicted of threatening to kill and on 22 October 2009 he was tried and convicted upon the indictment of attempted murder and was sentenced on 20 November 2009 to 7 years imprisonment less the 214 days already spent on remand.

Under Section 15(1)(b)of the Architects Act 1997 the Professional Conduct Committee (the PCC) may make a disciplinary order in relation to a registered architect if he has been convicted of a criminal offence (other than an offence which has no material reference to the architect’s fitness to practice).

Under the Architects Act the PCC is conscious of its twin duties of protecting the public and the need to sustain public confidence in the reputation of the profession of an architect.

Mr. Wille maintained that the criminal conviction did not relate to his professional life but only his personal relationship with his wife, and indeed he referred to the judge’s remarks that in his opinion Mr. Wille did not present a significant risk to the public.

 However, the judge at his trial noted in his sentencing remarks that Mr. Wille “had developed a drinking habit”. Reference is made to an earlier criminal conviction relating to alcohol. Mr. Wille told the PCC that it was a drink/driving offence at Christmas 2007. Mr. Wille further said that alcohol had been a problem for a number of years.

Mr. Wille showed the PCC a copy of the pre-sentencing report in which it is said that Mr. Wille had committed earlier acts of violence against his wife and that Mr Wille “continues to have the potential to cause serious harm”.

Mr. Wille also confessed that he has had problems dealing with high stress and work has caused him stress and that alcohol was part of the problem.

Mr. Wille informed the PCC that he had attended an anger management course while in prison but had as yet not attended a similar course in respect of alcohol abuse.

His inability to deal with stress and his tendency to violence albeit so far in a domestic situation does have a relevance to his fitness to practise.

Given the above the PCC concluded that there should be a marker for the public (into whose homes Mr. Wille could be invited if he took up domestic practice of a registered architect on release) that Mr. Wille is an architect with criminal convictions for violence.

The purpose of the legislation is to protect the consumer and safeguard the reputation of architects. In the circumstances the PCC has decided that the only appropriate sanction is erasure.

Mr. Wille is at liberty to apply to be re-instated as a registered architect after 2 years.

Back