GAVRIELIDES ν. COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTS
(1985)3 CLR 1743 THE CYPRUS LAW REPORTS ΠΑΓΚΥΠΡΙΟΣ ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΙΚΟΣ ΣΥΛΛΟΓΟΣ CyLaw | Αναφορικά μ'εμάς | " target="_top">Επικοινωνία | Όροι χρήσης Έρευνα - Κατάλογος Αποφάσεων - Εμφάνιση Αναφορών (Noteup on) - Αρχείο σε μορφή PDF - Αφαίρεση Υπογραμμίσεων
(1985)3 CLR 1743 1985 July 12 [L. LOIZOU, J.] IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE 146 OF THE CONSTITUTION ANDRONICOS P. GAVRIELIDES, Applicant, v. THE COUNCIL FOR THE REGISTRATION OF ARCHITECTS AND CIVIL ENGINEERS, Respondents. (Case No. 471/71). Administrative Law-Administrative act-The Architects and Civil Engineers Law, 1962 s. 7-Application for registration under section 7
(2)(b)-Rejected-Applicant's Diploma had not at the relevant time been approved by the Council of Ministers as being of a standard equivalent to those mentioned in s. 7
(2)(a) of the said Law-Whether respondents had a duty to advise the Council of Ministers to approve applicant's Diploma as being so equivalent. Architects and Civil Engineers-Registration of-Qualification for registration under s. 7
(2)(b) of the above Law. The applicant is a graduate of the City University of London. On the 31.8.1981 he applied to the respondent Council for Registration as a Civil Engineer under the provisions of s. 7
(2)(b) of the Architects and Civil Engineers Law, 1962. The respondent Council informed the applicant by letter dated 23.9.197 1 that he was eligible for registration under s. 7
(2)(d) of the said Law. On the 8.10.197 1 the applicant asked the Council to reconsider his application for registration under s. 7
(2)(b) and requested it to advise the Council of Ministers to approve his Diploma as equivalent to that of the Metsovion National technical University of Athens and the Technical University of Instambul. At its meeting of the 20.10.1981 the Council rejected the applicant's said request. The applicant was not, however, informed of the decision and on 7.12.1981 filed the present recourse. Held, dismissing the recourse
(1)The applicant could not have been registered under s. 7
(2)(b) of the said Law because the Diploma of the City University of London had not at the relevant time been approved by the Council of Ministers as being of a standard equivalent to those of the Metsovion Technical University of Athens or the Technical University of Istanbul.
(2)The duty of the respondent Council, to advise the Council of Minister that the diploma of an applicant is equivalent to those mention in s. 7
(2)(a) of the said Law, arises only when, after examining the material before them, they are satisfied that the particular Diploma is so equivalent. In this case it is clear that the Council did not consider applicant's Diploma to be equivalent to those mentioned in s. 7
(2)(a). The Council, therefore, had no legal duty to advise the Council of Ministers to approve applicant's Diploma as being so equivalent. Recourse dismissed. No order as to costs. Recourse. Recourse against the decision of the respondents informing applicant that he was eligible for registration as a Civil Engineer under the provisions of section 7
(2)(d) and not under section 7
(2)(b) of the Architects and Civil Engineers Law, 1962 (Law No. 41 of 1962); and also against their omission to advise the Council of Ministers that the City University of London, of which the applicant is a graduate, is of the same standard as the Metsovion National technical University and the Technical University of Istambul. Z. Katsouris, for the applicant. L. Demetriades, for the respondents. Cur. adv. vult. L. LOIZOU J. read the following judgment. The applicant challenges the validity of the decision of the respondents contained in their letter dated 23rd September, 1971, whereby he was informed that he was eligible for registration as a Civil Engineer under the provisions of s. 7
(2)(d) and not under s. 7
(2)(b) of The Architects and Civil Engineers Law, 1962 (Law 41 of 1962) as he applied; their omission to register him Under s. 7
(2)(b) and their omission to advise the Council of Ministers that the City University, of which he is a graduate, is of the same standard, as the Metsovion National Technical University of Athens and the Technical University of Istambul. The applicant is a graduate of the City University of London having obtained his diploma in Civil Engineering on the 31st July, 1971. On the 31st August, 1971, he applied to the respondent council for registration as a Civil Engineer under the provisions of s. 7
(2)(b) of the Architects and Civil Engineers Law, 1962. The respondents considered the application at their meeting of the 8th September, 1971 and informed the applicant by letter dated 23rd September, 1971 (exhibit 2) as follows: "... The CITY UNIVERSITY of which you are a graduate, is included among the Universities exempted by the Institute of Civil Engineers of London from the examinations 'A' and 'B' conducted by it. In accordance with paragraph 7
(2)(
- d)of the Architects and Civil Engineers Law of Cyprus, the holders of such qualifications, as described in para. (
- d)of the above law, are registrable after they have acquired at least one year's practical training after obtaining such qualifications. On the basis of the above, I inform you that you will be registered as soon as you produce to the Council a certificate of practical training as above." The applicant addressed, on the 8th October, 1971, a letter 'to the respondents (exhibit 1) asking for reconsideration of his application for registration under s. 7
(2)(b) of the Law, stating that his diploma was equivalent to that of the Metsovion National Technical University of Athens and the Technical University of Istambul and requesting them to advise the Council of Ministers to approve it as such. The respondents at their meeting of the 20th October, 1971 took notice of the above letter of the applicant and decided to inform him that after consideration of the material submitted by him they came to the conclusion that the B. Sc. Diploma in Civil Engineering of the City University was not equivalent to the diploma of the Metsovion National Technical University of Athens and that, therefore, they could not suggest to the Council of Ministers to approve it under s. 7
(2)(b) of the Law. The applicant was not, however, informed as above and on the 7th December, 1971, he filed the present recourse, which is in effect directed against the refusal of the respondent Council to accept his application for registration under s. 7
(2)(b) of the Law. S. 7
(2)of Law 41 of 1962 reads as follows: "7
(2)A person shall be entitled to be registered as a Civil Engineer if the Board is satisfied that he is of good character, and that- (
- a)he is the holder of a diploma in Civil Engineering of the Metsovion National Technical University of Athens or of the Technical University of Istambul; or (
- b)he is the holder of a diploma in Civil Engineering of such other University or other Institution of the same standard as those mentioned in paragraph (
- a)above as may from time to time be approved by the Council of Ministers by notification published in the official Gazette of the Republic, on the previous advice of the Board, and until the Board is constituted without such advice; or (
- c)................... (
- d)is the holder of such qualifications which are recognized by the London Institute of Civil Engineers for exemption from their examinations 'A' and 'B' and has at least one years' practical training acquired after obtaining such qualifications; (
- e)................... " It is not in dispute that the diploma of the City University in Civil Engineering had not at the relevant time been approved by the Council of Ministers as being of a standard equivalent to those of the Metsovion National Technical University of Athens or the Technical University of Istambul it is, therefore, clear that the applicant could not have been registered as a Civil Engineer under s. 7
(2)(b). What remains to be considered is whether the respondents had any legal duty to advise the Council of Ministers that the diploma of the applicant was equivalent to those mentioned in s. 7
(2)(a) of the Law. The duty of the Council obviously arises only when, after examining the material before them, they are satisfied that the particular diploma is so equivalent. In the present case the respondents, although the application was for registration under s. 7
(2)(b), instead of dismissing it since the applicant could not be registered as per his application, proceeded to consider whether he could be registered under any other paragraph and found that he was eligible for registration under paragraph (d) of the same subsection. It is clear from the above and from the minutes of the meeting of the Council that they examined the qualifications of the applicant and did not consider them as being equivalent to those mentioned in paragraph (a). I, therefore, find that, in the circumstances, the respondents had no power to accept the application and also that they had no legal duty to advice the Council of Ministers to approve the Diploma of the City University in Civil Engineering as being equivalent to those mentioned above and that, therefore, the sub judice decision was reasonably open to them and no valid reason has been shown why it should be annulled. In the result this recourse fails and it is hereby dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Recourse dismissed. No order as to costs. cylaw.org: Από το ΚΙΝOΠ/CyLii για τον Παγκύπριο Δικηγορικό Σύλλογο