Before a claim against an architect or engineer goes to court, there is a set pre-action procedure. It is not the one used for claims against solicitors, surveyors who carried out a home survey, or accountants. This guide explains which protocol applies, what it requires, and how the Technology and Construction Court (TCC) deals with these claims in England and Wales. It describes procedure; it does not tell anyone how to run their claim.
Which protocol applies
The Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol says it applies to claims against a professional "(other than construction professionals and healthcare providers)" (para. 1.1). Paragraph 1.4 states that it "is not intended to apply to claims ... against architects, engineers and quantity surveyors – parties should use the Construction and Engineering Disputes (CED) protocol."
The Pre-Action Protocol for Construction and Engineering Disputes says it "applies to all construction and engineering disputes (including professional negligence claims against architects, engineers and quantity surveyors)" (para. 1.1). The TCC Guide (Edition 4.1, 2026) adds that in professional negligence claims against such professionals "and similar construction professionals, this Protocol prevails over the Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol".
The general overview of the professional negligence protocol is in this guide.
The steps
At the time of writing (October 2026), the protocol page on the Ministry of Justice website shows it as last updated on 17 February 2017. The steps are:
- Letter of claim (para. 7.1). It contains the claimant's and each proposed defendant's full name and address; a brief summary of the claim, including the main contractual or statutory provisions relied on and the relief claimed, "with a proportionate level of breakdown"; the names of any experts already instructed and the issues their evidence covers; and whether the claimant wants the Protocol Referee Procedure to apply. Expert reports are generally not expected at this stage, although succinct reports central to the claim can be included.
- Acknowledgment within 14 calendar days of receipt (para. 8.1), which may give the name and address of the defendant's insurer. If there is no acknowledgment within 14 days, the claimant "will be entitled to commence proceedings without further compliance".
- Objections to the court's jurisdiction, to the matter going to arbitration, or that the wrong defendant has been named, within 28 days of receipt of the letter of claim (para. 8.2).
- Letter of response within 28 days of receipt of the letter of claim (para. 8.5), with a brief and proportionate summary of the response, any counterclaim, the defendant's experts, and any third parties the defendant may bring in. If no response arrives within 28 days, the claimant may start proceedings (para. 8.6).
- Response to any counterclaim by the claimant within 21 days (para. 8.7).
- Pre-action meeting: within 21 days after the response (or the response to any counterclaim), "the parties should normally meet" (para. 9.1).
The parties may agree longer for any step, "save that no extension in respect of any step shall exceed 28 days in the aggregate" (para. 10.1). The TCC Guide notes that in cases of substance an extension for the defendant's response is "quite usual", and that on occasion parties agree a longer period than the protocol allows and agree that "no point will be taken" about technical non-compliance. The protocol ends at the meeting or, if none takes place, 14 days after the period for it expires (para. 10.2).
The pre-action meeting
The meeting is distinctive. The TCC Guide calls this "the only Protocol under the CPR that generally requires the parties to meet". The court normally expects the parties themselves (or someone with authority to settle), their lawyers, and any insurer's representative to attend (para. 9.2). The aim is to agree the main issues, identify the "root cause of disagreement", and consider whether the case can be resolved without litigation (para. 9.3). The meeting can itself take the form of mediation.
What is said at the meeting is "without prejudice", except that a party can tell the court that it took place, who attended or refused, any agreements reached, and whether other ways of resolving the dispute were considered (paras. 9.5–9.6). The TCC Guide also says the meeting "is not mandatory and may be dispensed with if it would involve disproportionate time and cost or it is clear that it would be unlikely to serve any useful purpose".
Proportionality, costs and time limits
The protocol says that in many cases, "including those of modest value", the letter of claim and response "can be simple" and costs "should be kept to a modest level" (para. 5.1). The court will treat its standards as the normal approach, but says it is "likely to be only in exceptional circumstances" that it imposes cost consequences for not following it (para. 4.1).
The protocol does not stop the limitation clock. If complying would make the claim time-barred, the claimant may start proceedings without complying, and must at the same time apply for directions; the court will consider pausing the case while the protocol is followed (para. 12.1). See time limits.
Adjudication
The Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 gives a party to a "construction contract" the right to refer a dispute to adjudication (s.108). Construction contracts include an agreement "to do architectural, design, or surveying work" in relation to construction operations (s.104(2)). The adjudicator must decide within 28 days of referral unless longer is agreed, and the decision binds the parties until the dispute is finally determined by legal proceedings, arbitration or agreement (s.108(2)–(3)).
The Act does not apply to "a construction contract with a residential occupier" (s.106), meaning one that principally relates to operations on a dwelling which one of the parties occupies or intends to occupy as their residence. A homeowner's appointment of an architect for their own home is therefore usually outside the statutory scheme, although the contract may still provide for adjudication.
The Technology and Construction Court
If a claim is issued, it will often be brought as a TCC claim. Under CPR 60.1(3), a claim may be brought in the TCC if "it involves issues or questions which are technically complex" or "a trial by a TCC judge is desirable". Practice Direction 60 lists, as an example, "claims by and against engineers, architects, surveyors, accountants and other specialised advisers relating to the services they provide" (para. 2.1(c)).
TCC claims can be issued in the High Court or in specified County Court hearing centres, in London and elsewhere. At the time of writing (October 2026), the TCC Guide says the TCC at the Rolls Building in London "will consider transferring claims of up to £1,000,000 to the Central London County Court unless there is good reason for it not to do so", and that practice differs in regional TCC centres. Since 1 October 2026 the High Court's TCC has been part of the new Business and Property Division, which replaced the Chancery Division (TCC Guide, para. 1.3.4; Senior Courts (Transfer, Amendment and Consequential Provision) Order 2026).
What a solicitor will want from you
- The appointment and any building contract, including any dispute resolution or adjudication clause.
- Everything already sent to or received from the professional or their insurer.
- A dated chronology and the key documents, so a proportionate letter of claim can be prepared.
- Any expert report already obtained, and who instructed it.
- The dates that matter for limitation: when the work was done and completed, and when the problem was discovered.
This guide is general information about the law and procedure of England and Wales. It is not legal advice. Court rules and guidance change; the protocol does not stop the limitation clock.
Frequently asked
Does the professional negligence protocol apply to architects?
No. The Professional Negligence Pre-Action Protocol says it is not intended to apply to claims against architects, engineers and quantity surveyors, and that parties should use the Construction and Engineering Disputes protocol. The construction protocol says it applies to all construction and engineering disputes, including professional negligence claims against those professionals.
How long does the architect have to respond to a letter of claim?
Under the construction protocol, the defendant should acknowledge the letter within 14 days of receipt and send a letter of response within 28 days of receipt. The parties may agree longer, but the protocol says no extension for any step should exceed 28 days in total. The TCC Guide notes that an extension for the response is quite usual in cases of substance, and that parties occasionally agree to go beyond the 28-day total.
Do we have to have a meeting before going to court?
The protocol says the parties should normally meet within 21 days after the response. The TCC Guide describes it as the only protocol that generally requires a meeting, but also says the meeting is not mandatory and may be dispensed with if it would be disproportionate or serve no useful purpose.
Can I take my architect to adjudication?
The statutory right to adjudicate applies to construction contracts, which include agreements to do architectural, design or surveying work. But it does not apply to a construction contract with a residential occupier, so a homeowner's appointment for work on their own home is usually outside it unless the contract itself provides for adjudication.