Licensed Professional Practice vs Contracting: Clarifying RA 4566 for Architects & Engineers

Brian Ernest Regalado Author

Jul 19, 2025 |

Why architects and engineers may lawfully manage or perform construction without a PCAB license—if not contracting "for a price."

WHY ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS MAY LAWFULLY MANAGE OR PERFORM CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT A PCAB LICENSE—IF NOT CONTRACTING "FOR A PRICE."

POSITION PAPER
On the Right of Licensed Architects and Civil Engineers to Undertake and Supervise Construction Works
Clarifying the Scope of RA 4566 in Relation to RA 9266 and RA 1582

Why architects and engineers may lawfully manage or perform construction without a PCAB license—if not contracting "for a price."

With Emphasis on Risk Allocation, Fiduciary Agency, and Public Protection

I. INTRODUCTION

The Philippine legal framework governing construction distinguishes between the professional practice of architects and civil engineers and the commercial contracting of construction works. Republic Act No. 4566 (Contractors’ License Law) regulates entities that engage in construction for a price, while RA 9266 (Architecture Act of 2004) and RA 1582 (Civil Engineering Law) define the scope of professional services that licensed architects and engineers are authorized to perform.

This position paper asserts that:

• Licensed architects and civil engineers are legally permitted to manage, supervise, and even undertake construction work—including project management and field execution—as part of their professional practice;
• What RA 4566 prohibits without a PCAB license is not technical or managerial execution, but the commercial contracting of works “for a price,” i.e., risk-bearing construction contracts where the party assumes full liability for delivery, materials, labor, and equipment;
• The distinction is rooted in the principles of risk allocation, fiduciary duty, and public protection—ensuring that those who contract to deliver construction are qualified not only technically but also financially and administratively.

II. PROFESSIONAL RIGHTS UNDER RA 9266 AND RA 1582

A. Architects (RA 9266)

Section 3(3) defines the “General Practice of Architecture” to include:

“...planning and architectural designing, structural conceptualization, specifying, supervising and giving general administration and responsible direction to the erection, enlargement or alterations of buildings…”

Section 3(4)(f) affirms that the “Scope of Practice” includes:

“...construction and project management, giving general management, administration, supervision, coordination and responsible direction... of the planning, architectural designing, construction, reconstruction, erection, enlargement or demolition, renovation, repair... of buildings..."

✅ These provisions clearly empower architects to perform not only supervision, but the active performance of construction project management functions, including coordination, administration, and direct implementation—so long as they are not acting as contractors “for a price.”

📚 Sources: RA 9266 – LawPhil, RA 9266 – SC E-Library

B. Civil Engineers (RA 1582)

Section 24 of RA 1582 declares:

“The practice of civil engineering is a professional service, admission to which must be determined upon individual, personal qualifications... No firm, partnership, corporation or association may be registered or licensed as such for the practice of civil engineering..."

✅ This affirms that civil engineering is a personal, licensed profession, and includes the right to plan, supervise, and manage construction activities. Civil engineers may perform construction-related functions—including field operations and technical implementation—as long as they do not enter into lump-sum contracts that assign them commercial risk.

III. CLARIFYING THE AMBIGUITY OF “FOR A PRICE” UNDER RA 4566

A major source of legal ambiguity is the phrase “for a price” in RA 4566. This must be clearly understood in its proper context: it refers not to any form of professional compensation, but to contracting under a fixed lump sum—where a party agrees to deliver a finished structure by assuming full risk over materials, labor, equipment, and delivery.

In contrast, a Build by Administration arrangement is not a commercial contracting agreement. In this method:

• The licensed architect or civil engineer is paid only for their professional services;
• The client pays suppliers, laborers, and subcontractors directly;
• The professional provides construction project management, including site coordination, scheduling, quality control, and documentation—but does not assume commercial risk.

This form of delivery is explicitly within the bounds of what the laws governing architects and engineers allow—even if the professional performs construction management or technical direction—because they are not contracting “for a price.”

What qualifies as contracting “for a price” is not simply whether the professional is building something they designed or not. That interpretation is not based on law or state licensing frameworks, but on subjective preferences of parties who favor more restrictive readings.

Thus, the phrase “for a price” must be properly limited to what it legally intends: the assumption of financial and delivery risk under a single-price contract.

IV. RISK ALLOCATION AND FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY

In the construction industry, risks are inherent and multifaceted. These risks can be broadly categorized into:

Professionals as Fiduciaries

Licensed architects and engineers are fiduciaries—legally and ethically bound to act in the best interest of their clients and the public. Their professional duty includes:

• Exercising due care in technical decisions,
• Avoiding conflict of interest,
• Providing truthful advice and responsible direction.

While they carry technical and some legal risk, they are not structured nor licensed to assume full commercial delivery risk, which is the domain of PCAB-licensed contractors.

V. DISTINGUISHING PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE FROM COMMERCIAL CONTRACTING

VI. POLICY RECOMMENDATION

To preserve both professional integrity and public protection, regulatory agencies (CIAP, DTI, PRC, LGUs) should:

• Clarify that architects and civil engineers may perform construction project management, including field-level implementation and coordination, as long as they do not assume commercial contracting risk.
• Interpret “for a price” under RA 4566 narrowly—to apply only to risk-bearing, lump-sum contracting agreements.
• Enforce recognition of Build by Administration as a legitimate, lawful form of project delivery—not merely as an option, but as a fully permitted mode of executing construction projects under the professional laws governing architects and civil engineers.

This includes its exercise as a form of full-service Construction Project Management Practice, as explicitly authorized by:

• Section 3(3) of RA 9266 — defining the General Practice of Architecture to include “supervising and giving general administration and responsible direction to the erection… of buildings”;
• Section 3(4)(f) of RA 9266 — listing construction and project management as part of the Scope of Practice;
• Section 24 of RA 1582 — recognizing construction-related services by civil engineers as part of their licensed professional work.

This form of practice—where professionals are compensated for their services while the client directly pays for materials, labor, and equipment—is within the legal and ethical boundaries of state licensing, and must be protected from misinterpretation or overreach.

Introduce clear national guidance and implementation alignment between PRC, PCAB, and CIAP to avoid overlapping or conflicting enforcement.

VII. THE NEED FOR HARMONIZATION: SPHERES OF COMPETENCE FRAMEWORK

To meaningfully distinguish and align the roles of licensed professionals and licensed contractors, the industry requires a coherent governance model that bridges technical practice, commercial contracting, and regulatory accountability. The Spheres of Competence in Construction Project Management Practice (SOC-CPMP) Framework, developed in partnership with CMDF, offers such a solution.

Without overhauling current laws, it enables a standards-based mapping of responsibility, risk, and capability across all functions—from design and supervision to contracting and delivery. By providing structured role clarity through tiered competencies, credentialing, and firm benchmarking, it supports lawful practice, enhances public protection, and ensures each actor in the built environment carries the right risk at the right level of authority.

VIII. CONCLUSION AND CALL TO ACTION

Licensed architects and civil engineers, as defined by Philippine law, may rightfully supervise and perform construction activities—including construction project management and field implementation—as part of their professional services. They are not required to obtain a PCAB license unless they assume full commercial contracting risks by agreeing to deliver a completed project “for a price.”

Understanding this distinction is not merely a legal nuance—it is essential for protecting public safety, strengthening accountability, and empowering lawful professional practice in the construction industry.

Now is the time to act.

We call on:

• Regulatory agencies to harmonize interpretations and affirm the legal rights of licensed professionals;
• Professional organizations to equip members with the clarity and confidence to operate lawfully and effectively;
• Clients and stakeholders to choose delivery models that are transparent, compliant, and centered on competence, with risk correctly allocated to licensed professionals (natural persons) for technical accountability and licensed contractors (juridical entities) for commercial responsibility.

With sound policy, aligned regulations, and a framework like SOC-CPMP, the Philippines can build better—with certainty of success in every project.

This article is part of Build Quotient’s advocacy to uphold lawful and ethical professional practice in the construction industry. For related reading:
Next Article: Not Just Legal — It's Constitutional

About the Author
Ar. Brian Ernest L. Regalado, ACIArb, EDPM, CIPM is a certified ISO 17024:2012 Project Management Professional and holds an Advanced Professional Award in Construction Contract Management from The CCM UK. As the Lead Educator and Principal of Build Quotient+, he leads one of the few independently CMDF-Authorized Training Partners in the Philippines. He also represents the Philippines and Southeast Asia in the International Institute of Project and Program Management (I2P2M).

He is both a private practitioner and a government-recognized expert. This position paper is written not to advocate for one party or profession, but to promote the common good of all stakeholders across the industry—through lawful interpretation, fair regulation, and professional integrity.

Disclaimer: This paper is for educational and advocacy purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. For specific cases, consult appropriate regulatory authorities or legal counsel.