Talk to us
Live Chat
Mr Colin James Doig
THE ARCHITECTS REGISTRATION BOARD
PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT COMMITTEE
In the matter of:
COLIN JAMES DOIG (061134D)
_______________
Present:
Neil Dalton (Chair)
Stuart Carr (Architect Member)
Rachel Childs (Lay Member)
_______________
Decision of a Consent Order Panel of the Professional Conduct Committee in respect of the charges against Colin Doig (“the Registered Person”)
A disciplinary order is imposed upon the Registered Person. The order is one of erasure.
In respect of the charge against Colin Doig (061134D) (“the Registered Person”):
The Registered Person:
i. accepts the facts and matters set out below and consents to the Consent Order Panel of the Professional Conduct Committee making a disciplinary order against him in the terms set out below; and
ii. confirms that he has been offered the opportunity to appear before a Hearing Panel of the Professional Conduct Committee to present his case, but does not wish to do so; and
iii. confirms that he waives the time requirement under Rule 38 of the Investigations and Professional Conduct Committee Rules 2022 for a Consent Order to be served not less than 42 days before the date fixed for the hearing of the Charge.
The Architects Registration Board (ARB) accepts the facts and matters set out below and consents to the Professional Conduct Committee making a disciplinary order against the Registered Person in the terms set out below:
The Allegation:
The allegation against the Registered Person is that:
1) At Dundee Sheriff Court on 30 April 2024, the Registered Person was convicted of two criminal offences, other than an offence which has no material relevance to his fitness to practice as an architect, being:
a. on 20 November 2022 at Dundee [address omitted for confidentiality] you COLIN JAMES DOIG did behave in a threatening or abusive manner which was likely to cause a reasonable person to suffer fear or alarm in that you did act in an aggressive manner towards your then 14 year old son, [Child A], born [Redacted date] care of Police Service of Scotland, pursue him with a meat cleaver or similar implement, chase him up the stairs, repeatedly punch and kick on a door and shout and scream; CONTRARY to Section 38(1) of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010; and
b. on 20 November 2022 at Dundee [address omitted for confidentiality] you COLIN JAMES DOIG did assault [Person B], your wife, c/o the Police Service of Scotland, and did repeatedly push her on the body causing her to fall to the floor to her severe injury and it will be proved in terms of section 1 of the Abusive Behaviour and Sexual Harm (Scotland) Act 2016 that the aforesaid offence was aggravated by involving abuse of your partner or ex-partner
In respect of a. and b. above, the Registered Person was sentenced to carry out 225 hours of unpaid work; and in respect of a., above, a notice of reference under section 7 of the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (Scotland) Act 2007 was ordered.
It is considered that there is a case to answer in that the criminal convictions referred to above would be relevant to the Registered Person’s fitness to practise in terms of section 15(1)(b) of the Architects Act 1997.
Statement of agreed facts:
1. The Registered Person is Colin James Doig, a registered architect of Dundee. On 30 April 2024, the Registered Person was convicted at Dundee Sheriff Court in respect of the following charges: (i) behaving in a threatening or abusive manner which was likely to cause a reasonable person to suffer fear or alarm in relation to Child A (his son) contrary to section 38(1) of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010; and (ii) assaulting Person B (his wife), this offence being aggravated by involving the abuse of his partner or ex-partner.
2. At the time of the offence, the Registered Person was living at his previous home address, with his son, Child A, and his wife, Person B.
3. The conduct for which the Registered Person was convicted occurred on 20 November 2022 at around 10pm. The Registered Person and Person B had been drinking that evening. Person B went to bed.
4. The Registered Person then entered Child A’s bedroom. There was a disagreement, following which Child A went downstairs into the kitchen. The Registered Person went downstairs and continued the dispute. The Registered Person picked up a meat cleaver, or similar implement, and chased Child A with it. Child A then went upstairs, pursued by Person B. Child A then locked himself in the bathroom upstairs, and the Registered Person repeatedly punched and kicked the door, and shouted and screamed at Child A.
5. Person B, having woken up during the dispute downstairs, tried to intervene, at which point the Registered Person pushed her to the body. This caused her to fall to the floor. Person B tried to get up, but the Registered Person pushed her to the body again, causing her to fall down again. Person B called the police, and the Registered Person went downstairs and waited for the police. The Registered Person’s violent conduct towards Person B caused her to sustain an unstable spiral fracture of the left tibia. As a result, Person B had to undergo an operation, during which she had 8 pins, and a plate put in and was then placed in a moonboot. The above events are described in the witness statements taken by Police Scotland on 20 November 2022 and 29 November 2022 from Person B; and 5 December 2022 from Child A.
6. Following his guilty plea on 30 April 2024, at a sentencing hearing at Dundee Sheriff Court on 28 June 2024, the Registered Person was sentenced to a Community Payback Order in cumulo, being 225 hours’ unpaid work. In respect of the conviction in relation to his son, the Registered Person was also made the subject of a notice of reference under section 7 of the Protection of Vulnerable Groups (Scotland) Act 2007, the effect of which is for the court to provide to Scottish Ministers information which may lead to the listing of the individual as being barred from working with children and/or adults.
7. The ARB became aware of Mr Doig’s conviction following a press article regarding his guilty plea.
Statement as to conviction for a criminal offence with material relevance to fitness to practice as an architect:
8. The Registered Person admits that he has been convicted of a criminal offence, other than an offence which has no material relevance to his fitness to practice as an architect. The allegation, as set out above, is admitted in full.
Disciplinary Order
9. Section 15(1)(b) of the Architects Act 1997 states that the Professional Conduct Committee may make a disciplinary order in relation to a Registered Person who “has been convicted of a criminal offence other than an offence which has no material relevance to his fitness to practice as an architect. “
10. The Consent Order Panel of the Professional Conduct Committee, with the consent of the parties and having taken account of its responsibilities to protect the public and maintain the reputation of the profession, makes a disciplinary order of Erasure.
11. In particular, the Committee took account of:
i. The violent and threatening conduct of the Registered Person towards Child A and Person B as outlined in the extract conviction.
ii. That the Registered Person’s assault of Person B caused serious injury requiring surgery.
iii. That the Registered Person’s conduct caused Child A and Person B to fear that the Registered Person would kill Child A.
iv. That the sentence of unpaid work was imposed as a direct alternative to imprisonment.
12. The Committee has also taken account of the Registered Person’s admissions and explanations, in particular:
i. The Registered Person’s admission of all aspects of the allegations and engagement by him with the ARB throughout the disciplinary process.
ii. The Registered Person has no previous disciplinary history.
iii. The Registered Person received a diagnosis of Bipolar Affective Disorder Type 1 in July 2023). In an email response to the ARB of 3 June 2024 the Registered Person stated that, according to the social work reporter to the court, this diagnosis “shall have had an effect on [his] behaviour pertaining to the incident”.
13. In light of the above, including the seriousness of the conviction and the events which led to the conviction, the Committee considers that this is a matter has material relevance to the Registered Person’s fitness to practice as an architect. The Committee considers that the imposition of a disciplinary order of erasure would be appropriate to protect the public interest.
14. The admitted allegation has the potential to diminish both the Registered Person’s reputation and that of the profession generally and therefore the parties agree that the Registered Person’s conduct is sufficiently serious to require the imposition of a disciplinary order. In light of the serious nature of the convictions the parties agree that the imposition of an ERASURE order is an appropriate and proportionate disciplinary order to impose.